Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Ferrara

Members
  • Posts

    67
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ferrara

  1. I really was not going to come back to this forum and I believe this is the last comment on Q. If you at all read Fultons account on Q with his bending of plates, you know that he said when the parts of the violin are high Q they become low Q when you put them together. So as far as you guys thinking youre going to get a runaway train that rings out of control you are not. I get high Q plates and then glue them to the ribs. I test the Q again and it is high--as high as each plate was before..Upon installing the post the Q drops off like a ton of bricks.
  2. Ctviolin---You said a lot of things some of which I believe agreed with "my presentation " I sincerely and for the life of me dont understand and I do get this feeling that there is some sort of resentment.In your stattement you seem to summarily dismiss the science of accoustics. I cant understand why. You seem to dismiss the notion of Q yet I am sure that your violins are probably made using some criteria for example weight as indicated by Harry Wake who gave us some sense when he stated that the maple should be 115 gms plus or minus 10 and the spruce should be 78 gms plus or minus 10. I am I shouldsure and you are sure that if you made plates that are excessively heavy you would not get too much sound out of them. Please keep an open mind--it doesnt hurt. Note that I have not come up with a lot of these ideas yet I embrace them because to me they make a lot of sense scientifically or "visually"and above all they seem to have worked for me---I truthfully believe that the last 6 or so violins have consistently sounded great-----I know the proof is in the pudding as they say.But I can see the differences in the higher registers the ease of extracting sound from them and projection. I have never had to change my post setting.Now you guys may say "this guy is nuts" But it is true all my four strings appear "equal tempered" I realize you must test each string to see "how loud" they sound and there differences like in all violins but when you play them "you" dont get the feeling that one string "is better' than another. Perhaps I will soon prove Im correct or be wrong. I should say that I have tested each open string in terms of decibles at a distance and I get in my opinion good results. I do not make any money spending my time just like you on this forum. But please tell me then what is it all about.And Michael, Darnton if you believe that presentation is everything I will only say that it was the best way I knew how at the spontaneous moment to express a notion about Q which I do believe to be important in violin making.
  3. Oded--I have heard the same thing you have about violin plates from the masters not haing a ring.I implore you now without prejudice to listen carefully.First of all violin tops have been retrofitted with larger bass bars and I can tell you and I assure you that Mr curtin et al will tellyou that you can lose the ring by installing a large bass bar.Consider the fact that the "masters of old" were known to tap their plates and flex them. They used gut strings then and it could be imagined that one would try to find a method to enhance the energy from coming out of the plate. We are told that they listend for some kind of tome or ring. If lets say for argument sake that this is correct and they were going for high Q despite perhaps fully understanding the way we may today.In other words they made the plate ring to some degree more or less and then the installation of our modern larger bars caused the ring to disappear. It is not to difficult to see that despite this you could still get what we consider a good or great sounding violin.You should also know that sometimes A ring is only heard close to the ear and not at a distance so that our concept of not hearing it may be flawed.Also if you dont hold the plate on a node you will not hear it. I am not saying that the people who tested these dont know what they are doing but I can tell you sincerely that many many times in testing my plates I have been frustrated when it seemed that the ring disappeared and then Holding it in a different position slightly different than before I got the ring. This happened several days ago as it has in numerous occasions .The question becomes also are you holding it in the place which will activate or not oblitersate the 5th mod. .So far no one has told me if my presentation is correct or not.Im going to let it slide for now. and say the following . There are different people out there including me making violins some for selling and profit some for hobby etc. When I present something on this forum I am trying to reach those people who perhaps want to consitently make good sound violins. I believe that all or most of you are trying to do so and possibly become infuriated when I come along seemingly with an air of arrogance--I am not arrogant. Consider the "Maters" when they tapped and twisted the violin plates do you believe they were simply trying to make a good violin? They actually beat us out in a scientific sense because they were looking for consistency ie how do I make a good violin every time?Thats mainly what this is about anyway. Some people that I have met say to me "OH so and so sometimes makes a good violin its hit and miss" I realize also that many of you dont have equipment that could enhance in my opinion what you make. This is not a critisizim but a fact. Those of you who fit in this catagory may be better off than those who have for the simple reason that its a pain in the ass(hope Jeffrey Holems doesnt throw me out) to use such equitment to constantly moniter in latter stages of carving your work.Having said this and not knowing if I have resolved my understanding of Fultons statement I dont believe any of you would be interested in the topic Grounds and souonds that John Beames has in my opinion generously given us My critique of that article along with something that I thought important will have to wait for another time.
  4. Ok guys lets set up another firestorm and let me take you on a trip to the belfry and please not bats in the belfry comments.I want to understand a statement and or concept that I cannot for the life of me understand and I believe it to be important.Also kindly attempt to make me "see" or visualize without using laws of physics etc Ive had my fill of science education learning mostly to go to the right book when something was "not learned" or unclear.If I get the answer to this "problem" I promise you I will post some info on one of my "accoustic heros" namely John Beams of Austrailia for his topic on grounds and sound that seems to have gone be the wayside with no one anylizing it that I know of etc.My other heros are Hutchinson, Curtin, and William Fulton the latter being the object of this quest, ie not him personaly but a comment which I praise him for getting me to think more.When questioned by Curtin in the VSA ref Q Fulton states "It takes longer to get a highQ mechanical system moving and more energy to stop it"A high Q peak is like a bell it just rings forever and it takes a real good clapper to get it started"We find ourselves beneath the belfry where the larger bell is above and someelse has a much smaller bell below. The monk begins pulling on the ropes.Two things come to mind as bothering me immediately1-The mention of the need for a good clapper and 2 my visuilization of the pulling one the ropes to start the bell by first overcoming the inertia of the mass. The "good clapper" for the time I put on the back burner. Let us also predicate this story by simply saying that we will measure Q by the ringing ie how loud it rings. I believe and correct me if Im wrong the longer something rings on impact the louder it will sound all things being equal.Intuitively we see that the monk with the small bell can in no way compare his ringing bell with the larger insofar as ringing or loudnes.Let us deviate for a moment to put things into perspective and see "The wood issue" Wood is similar to the bell that it can ring also.My brother tells me some wooden bells made with "good wood" have good ringing qualities and although our violin plates are not shaped into a bell they have mass and accompanying stifness if I may, the same as the smaller and larger bells.Note that Fulton mentions that carleen Hutchinson trims her bass bar till the Q peaks ie she gets the longest ring so to speak.Intuitively we know that the large bell has the higher Q relative to the wood that carleen is working on and higher than the smaller bell as mentioned. The reciprical of Q is damping so thatQ=1/Q thats simple to see even for me. Now the question why is the higher Q more difficult to move and harder to stop and how does it relate the Carleen trimming the bass bar?Good question at least dont you think' My understanding of Q and I could be wrong--Im not immune to that--but I want to visuilize. Incidently My daugter knows a physicist to whom I spoke to last night and although it seems that Fulton is correct I could have no problem whatsoever with that--but frankly I was somewhat caught short, with all due repect to "him" I was not able to go step by step like am doing now.As I once told a professer "science is easy but getting along with people is another story" He totaly agreed. Lets continue our travels destiny unknown presently. Incidently lest you think I am totaly ignorant I do realize that in dealing with this subject that there are internal considerations resistances or damping heat losses molecueles etc that are involved with that etc. I wasn to see the relationship with pushing a heavy box full of sand and presently not interested in the internal structure of the box itself. Is it difficult to get the highQ bell started because of it mass ie inertia? If this is the case, what if we decide to send our monk up to the belfry allowing him to wear earplug otherwise he will sue us quit his job or both. and we in stead let him ring the bell with a large hammer. Intuitively we see there is something differentl here.The mass of the bell is not being moved as before to allow the clapper to ring it and the need to syncronize the pulling of the ropes etc to put everything in phase. My notion is that when you set out to obtain a highQ you are makeing things easier in the sense that you want to get the most energy (ringing) for the least amount of input or driving force consistant with what you are going to drive it with or compelled to drive it with. The hammer or clapper is suitable for the bell and the bow for the violin and plate that Carleen is working at. Intuitively, at least in my mind is the idea that I must consider the driving force with the the notion of Q. A cave man decided he needed a way to signal his friends that dinner was ready so he began to cast an enormous bell larger than our former church bell and got a million men to hang it in the belfry. The bell was actually the same size or configuration as our former bell but it was like 3feet thick. The man tried to ring it with a large stone but what happened.Now since I have never been in a situation like this I can venture a guess and say that I dont think he got too long or loud of a ring. By the way he was using the same material I think bronze is what they use (smart cave man he at least got the material correct). Since this cave man has magical powers he magically thins out the thickness of the bell and tries again.Perhaps he sees some improvement but yet cant tell.He continues magically pealling or layers of thickness and low and behold he is able to call everyone to dinner. Carleen Hutchinson appears in my minds eye to have done the same--raising the question and what perplexes me "did the cave man make the bell easier to ring or not?" It should be noted that in comparison to the small bell and the wood Mrs Hutchinson is working on that the higher Q bell (Longer ring and intensity of sound) is more difficult to start in the sense (if this is the answer) that a larger force is needed to operate it or drive it.You get nothing for nothing--you need larger forces to drive large energy producing systems---but you try to get the maximun energy out of the system by using the "right" materials etc ie use as small an energy imput and obtain the largest amount of output you need or in the case of the wood I will quote Curtin who when I asked about Q (telephone conversation) said "theres not too much you can do about that" Although he did not elaborate further I later realized not incorectly I believe that you can only get so much energy orQ out of the wood and no more. I rest my case--I did want to mention something else to calm all yuou violin makers out there who may not aspire to Q but I promise you later if I can resolve this "problem"
  5. Ferrara

    tap tone

    Selim--I caught your last comment and its what Ive been trying to say.If you are observing and increase in amplitude on an scope there should be an increase in sound intensity if we are measurin sound. I like to measure sound intensity directly with a decible meter. In other words I am interested in how the plate is reacting with the air so to speak. Whatever you want to attribute to the wood ie stiffness and mass amplitude etc I would like to know "how its moving the air" or intenity of sound. Thanks for thinking about this. There is one more thing that is in my mind quite interesting and this may set another "firestorm" I have mentioned damping and relate it to stifness. I am quite aware that if you look at a spring and mass system they sometimes show a dashpot to denote damping. There is some confusion about topics I read ie Fultons bending of plates whereby one time he notes that it is easier to move a lighter mass and in another comments he states that "an example the first peak, if low amplitude may indicate excessive stiffness in the plates" I always understood that when you have excessive stiffness you remove wood. What I am trying to convey is the question is it stiffness or ist mass that inhibits the plate from responding to a pulse or driving force enabling it or not enabling it to vibrate with the forces to move air---intensity. If the plate is too stiff my opinion is that it is difficult to move---and my method removes stifness and alows the plate to move. I hope I made this clear. The notion I wish to convey and which I espouse is that when you go for the high Q you make the plate less stiff, "movable" or flexible and end up with the "correct" stiffness to mass that enables you to drive the air. Both stiffness and mass are needed to push the air to give you the greatest sound intensity the plate has to offer. I dont understand the concept "they" give about a larger mass is more difficult to move. If you are pushing a box or boxes full of different amount of sand then it is true that the massive box is more difficult to move. However with the violin plate if I were to construct a mechanical analog it sould show the plate as a spring.Systems sometimes have more than one characteristic ie resistance that may appear obviou. But to make things easier to "see" you sometimes must simplify concepts and not make them more complicated than what you can do to :repair" or correct them.
  6. Ferrara

    tap tone

    Michael, I have built about fourty or so violins using the "traditional" idea of thin plates similar to strad and matching plates as to tap tones ie 1/2 tone away 1 tone away etc. These violins never came close to what I have made in the past five years. Now I know everyone argues as to what is good tone etc. I learned to play the violin by ear and I dont play bad if I may say so myself. I definitley hear the extraordinary differences of the violins I made using the High Q method. There was one violin I made the old way that didnt sound bad but was no match for what I have now. You ccan play on the upper registers with no problems. I have three actually five violins made similarly and with differen coatings. They all sound great and now I understand the coatings better because I understand the transient time better. Someone in this forum mentioned something about arching a getting a higher velocity of sound. Now I dont want to start more turmoil but I believe that concept is incorrect. What is needed is to slow the velocity of the wave front somewhat. When you remove wood you are in effect doing that also. and the transient time is effected. What is needed is a somewhat longer transient time. The higher the stiffness to mass the shorter the transient time. The transient time gives color to the violin. For starters when you bow a string you want to hear a chord not an arpeggio---now I know thats going to start a "fight"-----I believe I am the only one with this concept or at least has stated it. A longer transient allows all the the transients or harmonics to rise to their fullest extent thereby giving maximum amplitude and what I call the "Chord effect" rather than the arpeggio--- when I play piano I relate to this in the sense that the chord has a unique sound over the arpeggio which includes the notes of the chord played one at a time rapidly or slowly as the case may be. Actually I never wanted to start this business about Q but this morning I got out on the wrong side of the bed--however science is science and I truly believe what I have conveyed insofar as others have also stated is correct. Testing is important and crucial--the way you test could influence the test results etc. Thanks for the comments Michael.
  7. Ferrara

    tap tone

    Ok everyone Im going to try to make this my last thought. Lisaten up---Q is a relative measurement with no units as you know--One of the posts states something like a having a piece of metal and a piece of wood having the same weight and the metal having higher Q-----I dont see how this relates to the violin plate. Q is used in electronics and in other endeavors and can be measured in different ways acording to your needs.The ringdown time of the plate is one of them and and the E/E .You cannot compare the high q of a metal with that of wood. The whole idea of using a high Q method is to obtain the most energy or output consistent with the range of driving forces used to drive the system. Selim dont make things more complicated than you understand-----you know intuitively what stiffness is. Look at the spring and mass system. A stiffer spring is more difficult to extend is it not? As far as that comment someone made about Curtin finding that mass alone is related to a good violin point me to the article I dont think curtin says that mass is the determining factor--to my knowledge he has always espoused the need for the right stifness to mass. And Stifness is a factor in damping--someone out there doesnt think so..As far as the comment someone made that we have learned new things since Carleen Hutchinson wrote the articles on Q---show me----Let me also say something about damping or the need for damping. All mechanical systems by nature have damping. If you say you want to dampen a system you are saying you want to introduce some form of resistance which will lower the out put or amplitude.Interestingly the reciprical of Q ie 1/Q is damping. You must ask yourself if I dont go for a high Q I am somehow increasing or leaving the system damped. How does the violin work------dont make it complicated. Once again I ask all those "against" high Q---what are you doing when you remove wood? Goodby and goodluck
  8. Ferrara

    tap tone

    Kishony---I understand quite well what you say and with no disrespect and I sincerely mean this --tell me why do you remove wood from the plate? -------what is to be accomplished--and please--Im not trying to be sarcastic but really trying to either learn something myself or clarify something for someone ese
  9. Ferrara

    tap tone

    Selim and Dean Lapinel----I will try to answer both your questions Firstly Dean you ask what do tap tones have to do or relate to F=MA. If you simply construct on the basis of tap tones you could miss getting the most from the plate meaning that you may make the plate too stiff to "soft" .Think about the analogy of you sitting in a car and cars and trucks going by which sometimes move your car due to what? F=MA In the same way your plate must have the right stiffness and mass as Curtin always saysIt is the stiffness or K factor in a spring and mass system that determines hoe much it can be extended with a certain force or mass. If the spring is too stiff its hard to move. If you have two of these systems one with a greater mass and more stiffness than the other you could see that extending both to the same amplitude will result in a "harder hit" if you put your finger in the way of the massive one. However it also required more force to extend the stiffer spring. The plate is similar you must derive at the right stifness to mass and one of the ways to do this is how I have shown ross ie energy from the "ringing' of the plate.If you read inbetween the lines of what "the experts" are saying they say you cannot or should not go by tap tones. If you make a violin with the exact tap tones of a particular stradivari the chances are it will not work.Remember what is the plate doing----it is moving air and the greater the intensity the greater you hear and if done right will include higher harmonics. Selin, it is true that the plate is under tension . However there is no real mystery about whats happening. "They" say the Q drops and why-----because the system became stiffer. Note that the wood tone of the violin has increased higher than that of any of the individual tap tones. Thats because the main culprit the post has increased the stiffness to mass of the system along with the tension of the strings. But what you should think about and Im not trying to be a know it all. say to yourself what is really happening--in simple terms dont make the violin too complicated because all we presently do is remove wood or add wood in the case of the bass bar and then coat the plate etc. Regarding arching---that all goes into the same catagory as stifness to mass ratio. No matter how you make the arching you will still be faced with having to remove wood until what point do you think? Ask yourself why am I removing wood for? The completed violin is a reflection of the plates that you put together. If the plates are too stiff you will get less sound because the forces of the bow onto the string are not able to vibrate the plate with sufficient amplitude. I make the arching somewhat "flat" like Strad did and dont like to make it high under the fingerboard. Remember I am strictly talking about the plates not the bridge not the length of strings or angle of strings etc. These are important and I follow what has been discussed about these.If the plates are "fouled up" no bridge or post adjustment will help. Interestingly I should tell you that every violin I have made which I strongly believe sounds great I have never had to move the post I place the post in the same position pretty much and I get fairly even amplitude on all strings which I have tested from afar using a meter. Now you can argue with me if you want but always say to yourself "why am I removing wood" You wnat to increase the Q ie make the plate easire to move consistent with the forces you are using to drive it with.
  10. Ferrara

    tap tone

    It should be noted reference High Q that whether you do it intentionally or not every violin maker doesit.As soon as you remove wood you are going for high Q----you want to make the plate vibrate easily thats why you remove wood and with whatever means you are testing it flexing the bouts listening for the tone you are whether you like it or not or are aware of it or not you want the plate to respond eaily-----even Sacconi "Secrets of Stradivari" who is somewhat of an enigma tells you to use potassium silicate to make a hard concreted foundation which stiffens the plate and at the same time says the plate must be flexible.If what I say is incorrect you would be leaving the plates without scooping the underside and try to play the violin that way'
  11. Ferrara

    tap tone

    Hi Michael. Carleen Hutchinson is the one that mentions high Q and Im sorry to differ in opinion but she is correct. I have been making violins and experimenting for over 20 yrs and have experimented with different tap tone 1/2 tone away 1 tone away etc using various groounds---and my brother as well on his own has experimented and still does using different grounds and I have to tell you Carleen Hutchinson gets the credit with the idea of high Q. I used all my scientific knowledge and continue to do so and cannot get away from the fact that a high q is needed to get an accoustically good sounding violin that projects. "Recently" Fulton talked about bending violins to achieve a high Q and he is and engineer as I understand it. He and Hutchinson are correct. As far as one of the comments about how the plates should match regarding their tap tones: Hutchinson says get high Q on both plates---. The plates when attached to the ribs and made into a violin are coupled by the post-----and they work together and ressonate the tap tones are usually as Hutchinson has investigated ie 1/2 tone one tone or the same tone for each plate.It is a part of the natural system of the plates that when you obtain a high q that the plates will end up with the tap tones that way.Ther are other subtle aspects regarding modes ie mode 2 which Carleen Hutchinson talks about as well. I would like to see for myself a violin that is considered top notch in carrying power or projecting sound (high frequency content) and a low Q or no ring. Remember the Strads "they" talk about that have no ring or no high Q have had their bass bars retrofitted and that I can tell you could lower the Q or cause it "not to ring" However if Stradavari had a high Q to begin with (and he may not have called it that ) that could still be why the violin sound great.You tell me why Fulton goes to such great lengths to bend wood and he increases the Q by 34%. There could be some good sounding violins out there which on the surface may appear not to have or have had a high Q----and therein lies the rub---how are trhey being tested to determine what is being stated.
  12. Ferrara

    tap tone

    Ct et al--My comment "i didnt think you were going to get a straight answer" was meant to stir the pot so to speak and I assure not meant to degrade or nullify anyones comments. The truth is and I alway like to quote others ie Henry Strobel in his book states "someday violin makers will tell the truth" If anyone is to learn anything in this forum if that is one of the reasons for its existence is to attempt to use science as one of the tools to disseminate truth--I am a strong believer in science and although the violin is often considered an art which it is in some ways it also challenges our reasoning. I am sure that if you have read any of the literature VSA, catgut, Strad magazine that often information is not ,whether intentional or not is ommited. For example one may give you the tap tone of a stradavari plate and ommit its weight. Some may tell you that a plate does not ring and it may not---but on the other hand it would be nice to know how close to the ear was the plate held. Now you may think this insignificant but I can tell you from experience that sometimes you dont hear a ring until you bring it close to your ears .On the other hand I had a plate that gave me no ring at all It was a "Check" plate.Of course in doing this one must hold the plate correctly--I dont have to tell you that. Another area of "intrigue" is tap tones on "great violins" which have been retrofitted with bass bars. There is quite a bit of confusion therein.For example ive read that Stradavaris tap tone on for exasmple the top plate was finished at D# and then was raised to F# by Stradivari with the installation of the small bass bar which in fact was later retrofitted with a larger one-----and tell me what was the tap tone G# I dont think anyone has answered that question' Now the method i advised Ross with I will stand by and challenge anyone scientifically to show me where that is incorrect and not to the point.The plate no matter how you look at it uses its mass and stiffness to move the air. F=MA there is no getting around this that I know of.You cannot make a plate too thin otherwise it becomes like a rubber ball whereupon hitting the ground some of the energy is lost in the distrotion of the rubber ball. If you make the plate too thick or go by tradition you may not be getting all the energy out of it.It is the energy emmited from the wood that will give you high frequencies as well as low.If the plate is too stiff(sometime "they" say a greater mass is more difficult to move relating it to the violin plate) but really what the bridge and strings see in order to move the plate is stiffness not mass.It is true that the more massive wood is the stiffer it is. In conclusion then and without disparaging anyone(it is not my intension) What I gave Ross is a compilation of what all the "scientist" and "people in the know" say. ie high Q ringing quality etc. The way you arrive at this may or may not be intensional.That is to say that you may be doing something which will give you a high Q but you may not be considering it as such despite the fact that scientifically you may be doin so. There are also a lot of other challenging aspects relating to acoustics that could be discused like transient time----I believe that sometimes makers are and perhaps rightly so that they dont want to tell you everything they do to make a good sounding violin if they do. The truth is that even if someone gives you all the plans on how to build a 747 jet that you may not have the energy and the wherewithall to take on the challenge. Violin making is not easy even if you know what to do. Sorry if you believed I somehow offended you.
  13. Ferrara

    tap tone

    I didnt think you were going to get a straight answer to this question.I am going to give you the l answer to this. Forget about Tap tones. When I spokle to Harry Wake about a year before he passed away he said that since he wrote his book "we" have learned more.He said to the effect go by the ring or longest ring. What he was saying was what Carleen Hutchinson basically says ie get a high Q. What a high Q means is the "ringing time" There are different ways to measure Q but basically what you are doing is correct ie listening to the ring but it is somewhat deceptive or difficult. If you dont have a frequency generator to observe the 5th mode with a speaker below the plate driving it and particles spread on the plate which bounce around etc. You need to meausre the intesnsity of sound that comes off the plate. That is the Q in this case. Forget about high stiffness to mass that some talk about. All that does is allow you to compare twoplatesHow with the same weight or mass the high stiffness to mass having the higher frequency tap tone the implication being that this will generate the higher harmonics. There is a formula that shows that the higher the fundamental frequency ie tap tone mode 5 is that the higher the amplitude of the frqeuncies that are in the higher range.However this formula and similar formulas also show a damping factor also. In other words you should know that when someone says something ressonatesie sound upon the plate or violin it doesnt mean you are getting the highest amplitude or better still intensity of sound. The reason for this is damping. Take a spring and mass and plase it in a bucket of water pulldown on the mass and it will not occilate.Get yourself a decibel meter they are pretty cheap and set your self up with some sort of device like a piano hammer and allow the hammer to swing for a precice or standard swing all the time you are comparitively testing your plate.note that any wood has the highest stiffness to mass in the rough. As you remove wood or mass the S/M ratio decreases. Stiffness in our case is dampling--damping is a resistance---resistance must be defined and in this case I am defining it as stiffness.You will find that striking the plate when it is stiff produces very little decibles. Keep the meter in the same place all the time--remember all measurements are relative. As you take more and more wood off the frequency drops and so does the stiffness the stiffness falling at a faster rate than the mass thus the drop in frequency. We hear in terms of decibles generally speaking so that intensity of sound is what you are looking for not amplitude which is different.F=MA like Joseph Curtin says you need the right stiffness to mas , the right damping the right Q. The wood can only give you what it can only give in energy or Q.Carleen Hutchinson has researched tap tones and I believe she said that in all the old or good violing researched the T/T were from C# to D# the plates being half tone one tone and recently discovered to be the same tone for each plate. I have made violins having excellent tone which ranged with T/Tones as above mentioned all derived at using the Q method with no intention on my part to achieve a certain T/T The wood gave me its own T/T when it gave me the highest energy I was able to extract out of it. Dont be confused about comments that a high Q system is difficult to start and difficult to stop. It is important to decide and to consider how a system is going to be driven when you think of high q systems. A bell that has a higher Q than a violin because it rings louder and longer needs to be driven by something that is heavy like a ten pound hammer which of course cannot be used on a violin. The idea of obtaining a High Q is in our case obtaining the highest energy with a low driving force or range of forces. There are some othe aspects but I have given you the main one for now get a highQ on both plates-----The transient time is also affected as you remove wood and later coat the wood with ground varnish or all forms of matter which affect the S/M. The transient time is quite important also in this regard Ill simplyu say the less you put on the finished violin the better ------generally speaking.
  14. I know the violin shown is not a Strad. Now here is a game try to figure out how I know?
  15. Anotherthign which I have not seen or heard mention about placement of F holes is the F hole template itself that is to be used. I checked out some of the F holes given by Wake, strobel, Heron Allen etc and found that the distances of the centers of each holes or lenghth of the F holes could be different.They could end up in different places etc. Maybe I didnt interpret what I abserved correctly?
  16. Ferrara

    High 'Q'

    I read somewhere that a high Q is like a bell that is difficult to start and difficult to stop. How does this relate to the violin? In other words should we or should we not strive to obtain a high Q when making plates?
  17. Thanks for the input guys..Also take note that the Suzuki "people" seem to have a different peg hole taper than the one "commonly" used I decided not to retaper the holes but am using the adjustable Herdim peg shaver to get the same taper the pegs now have etc.Somewhat of a pain but Im managing it .Thanks again
  18. What is the difference between violin pegs and viola pegs? Can violin pegs be fitted to a viola 15 1/2 inch. The present viola pegs look the same as violin pegs.Since I am in a hurry to complete this repair which is a freeby what do you think
  19. Thanks gentlemen for the response on my rosin/bow question.That makes a lot of sense---- -
  20. As I recall getting rosin on a new bow is a big pain. International violin co. said To continually pass the bow over the rosin ie like you rosin your bow normally. I believe I read somewhere that you can disolve some rosin in alcohol and then spread it on the bow hair with a brush. The alcohol will disolve and the rosin will remain. Has anyone ever used this method---or can you grind some rosin into a powder and place it on the bow hair? Doing it the "normal way" takes forever
  21. Thanks guys for the response on string thickness etc. I have a new viola bow and though I used my violin bow on the viola I now want to charge the new bow with rosin. I remember reading somewhere and I remember doing this ie take rosin and disolve in alcohol and then brush it on the hairs.Rubbing the bow simply accross the rosin doesnt work. I am going to use the "alcohol method" unless someone tells me Im wrong. I have not dealt with too manyh new bows so Im somewhat precautious.
  22. I am working on a 15 1/2 inch viola and purchased Thomastix Infeld Dominant strings.Just for curiosity I measured the diameters----C=l.0mm G=.74mm D=>8mm A=.64mm. I noticed that the progression of widths from large to small puzzled me with the D string being larger than the G string. I labled each packet in large letters so that I would not put the wrong strings on etc but did not record the color.The colors are A=Blue D=Green G=Yellow C= Red. These are as I have stringed up the instrument which I tuned with no apparent problem and played with no apparent problem but since the previous person who made the bridge placed the strings within the grooves and I wanted to adjust so that the strings would be more outside the grooves. The question is did Thomastik or whoever mix up the strings in the packets.I also noticed theat the several sets of strings I also purchased for violin appeared to be all the same colors except for one string per set---usually as far as I can remember they all have been color coded? Any ideas whats going on or is it my imagination. I suppose it is possible for the diameters to be not necessarioly in sequence regarding diameters?
  23. What is the diameter of the viola sound post---a 15 1/2 model. The one in the viola presently averages 6.74mm and is chewed up somewhat and Im going to replace it?
  24. Thanks for the info guys-----I didnt think of india ink etc at all
  25. Im working on suzuki viola whose fingerboard in not ebony and has a thin glossy coating on it. Thats the way it was made. Some of the coating has come off in just a few spots and I can see the white wood . What can I coat it with--just the "white spots". I know there is an ebony stain out there is that what is being used in this case. I know its used on some ebony which is on the "brown side"
×
×
  • Create New...