Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

reguz

Members
  • Posts

    504
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

2743 profile views

reguz's Achievements

Enthusiast

Enthusiast (5/5)

  1. Andreas. I believe you did not get the recording we made when Staffan and I make the changes. Confirm and I send you by mail
  2. I am sure people experiences different A person with long experience as Staffan Borseman has I believe we can trust on. Whet is is doing as he says he activate the dynamic in the violin body. That you can fell playing pizzicato. I am not a player at all so I must trust what expert say and Staffan is one. This will not say you are wrong.
  3. Working together with Staffan Borseman how was the concert master for 25 years he told me that he always started payling and call it "warming upp" the instrument before the concert take place. He used the word massage like warming up the dynamic state.
  4. By rubbing the varnish, you reduce stiffness locally and the stress conditions produced by the strings will increase the stress condition at the location you did the rubbing. I also did this together with Staffan Boseman on a viola in the white We liked improving stress conditions on the belly and by scarping on the back in the STL sector shaped the back thus become less stiff and allow the end blocks rotating more. When that happens, the belly buckling forces increase and produce the result we liked to find out about. Staffan played and I scarped and he could give proof on the result we looked for.
  5. indefatigable you answer which I am grateful for but do you give any explanation how it is according to meaning? Don refers to 8 years of filing but never ever explains how he thinks a violin works. That's what should happen, otherwise it's just complaints that are of no use to anyone. So, if we're going to get somewhere, start by telling me what you know so I can learn something from you. Thank you
  6. Dear Hogo. You as all other only see the action of the bridge feet produced by the stress condition on the strings. BUT there is action on the end of the strings. THEY produces buckling on the belly arching and bending on the back arching. Yesterday in a talk with Peter we look at figure 25 and 27. When you only have load condition of the bridge the you should see the bridge move down. This will cause a horizontal force action on the end blocks (belly) and a pulling force on the back. This is what Gough and Stoppani show happening on the cross section. THUS, as result we see the opposite I mean as it works. The belly become buckled by inward acting forces and the back "only" become bend. In such condition the volume of the box changes. In the very important dynamic state, the structure vibrates in low frequency and it will produce breathing. Not as Gough shows you. As described earlier the strings does TWO things. FREQUENCY "injection" and basic dynamic behavior on arching shape. Play the pizzicato on the G string and you can feel the dynamic. Tell me where I can read any from Woodhouse, Stoppani or Gough about what happens on the ends of the strings. They only see bridge action.
  7. As I told before I tested during very long time by rubbing the varnish reducing the stiffness (say on the upper bout part) which increase the static stress condition on curves. When I got a negative result by rubbing on one bout area, I rubbed the varnish on the lower bout and got very good result. Continuous some time I got WULF behavior which tells me the frequency result are to close each other. Either the conditions are equal on the bouts or separated. Optimal is when both bout area participate producing the frequency with high amplitude. So, my experiences are arching shape condition with in my case the Stalls and stress condition on arching shape which influences the acoustic result. I did some of this testing together with Staffan Borseman. Thus with the ear of a very experienced player.
  8. What you say is You do not need to know the shape of the structure and its internal stiffness conditions. Is it this you say?
  9. Peter. I earlier gave another possible explanation. If the wood thickness in the center bout on the back is less thick the location of the sound post than by the moment of force on the end block the thinner wood in the center bout will become forced upward and the chord lien in length direction become longer which may result in lengthening s shown on figure 27. Also dis we discussed.
  10. To make may my opinion clear. What you see on the the figure 25 is what I believe happen by string load in static condition. I have studied this carefully and asked my selves how could it be that N Harris found what is shown on figure 27? That's why I show the figure!! I discussed this with Harris and we never came to a confirmed solution. It could be that it is just what his violin did. If string load act mainly upward we can say we have a rotation in relation to the sound post. This is what the figure shows. In that case there only arises a vertical movement that bend the back and buckles the belly. When I tested varnish removing on both belly and back in order to find out sound improvement I also did probably some stupid. I removed wood in the neck heal. Only very little. The complete sound result became different and very back. What happens? Yes, the neck rotates on the neck heal and do not act longer as is is shown the perfect what happens in figure 25. The deflecting of the buckling belly became affected. I had to do all over removing varnish on the belly bout shape and could get back the best result before scarping in the neck heal. This taught me a lot. So, choosing neck wood and how the wood is grown in horizontal layers is important. If they are not the possible result can be as figure 27 shows. One side become pulling the back more the other. This is still not totally understood by me. I have seen that some maker mounted a dowel inside the neck heal but I believe this was on a Cello. The other problems arise, cracking which show the movement of force acting on the neck heal.
  11. Peter, Do you need to ask? Can't you see the and undestand the figures?
  12. Professor G Bissinger is probably the person who has done the most research and his list of published articles is very long. When you refer to what he accomplished in collaboration with Strad 3D is extensive. But the question is in what way the result what he does is different what Stoppani and Gough do? What I mean is that the strings are not involved when sound is being produced. No one, including Bissinger, uses the strings to produce sound and measure the result. There is no underlying dynamic movement produced that attacks the various parts of the violin body that will produce the sound included. It takes place in a violin whose arching constantly bends and acquires a state of tension that changes continuously. The arching that initially becomes active through string tension acts as a spring when the string load varies as the instrument is played. None of this happens in the surveys that I have seen so far. With great respect for what Bissinger accomplishes, I unfortunately have to say that they miss probably the most essential thing, which is the functional dynamic state of the strings, which directly affects which frequency modes will be created on different arching sections. Bissingar with what he does misses the dynamic state completely. I fully accept the results of what he does but against the above his presentation lacks what is necessary for violin builders to be able to improve results completely. It is of course possible that you disagree with me but these are the facts I am referring to. Only when an examination is made of the varying string tension by playing with the bow do we gain an understanding of how everything works. My own examination of a geometrically constructed violin contains such peculiar features that at least I expect that in a dynamic examination of the same we shall obtain answers so as to be of use to violin makers. It is possible that you do not agree with me, but I have tried to explain the importance of how certain constructive properties affect the stress build-up and shape change. Instruments become shorter and wider in a dynamic state. The arching of the belly and back increases/decreases and creates a change in volume which thus creates a breathing state. These properties are nowhere previously described. What remains for me to do is a special investigation. It is required that at least five instruments built with that design language are included to get a verifiable result. It is required that the instruments be attacked with strings and thus a "string machine" must be manufactured. Soon these violins will be ready and hopefully next year such an examination can be carried out.
  13. Look at the Terry Borman animation. Count down the shown movements with a factor 100. What remain on the end blocks. Look at Martin Schleske showing how he measure frequency movement. This shows how Stoppani works and show movement on violin structure related to fix support Maestro 3.docx
  14. To Peter and Anders I say look at the movements in the animation. Support the end blocks just as Gough Stoppani and Goli do and hold by gravitation the and blocks down on on the support. What then becomes moving structure is the center that move up/down. The complete structure thus moves down and is hold at the support. I claim the result is not possible producing on a violin free violin in space and it's that we must discuss. How do we make our observation. There is no sense looking at circumstances that cannot arise on the hold instrument as they do. They move the complete instrument by its string load that bend the end blocks up and thus move the complete structure down. I have shown by a Holographic investigation that it are the end blocks moving. Also in the master dissertation where deflection becomes produced based on FEA show this. Is all this wrong? I say no. What you can do is giving a verifiable explanation on your opinion. There is only one answer on this question. Is it what Gough ; Stoppani and Goli do correct and is it me that is wrong.
  15. David, something become a structural member when we give it in the case of the STL a thickness. With other words there is an STL on the inside shape of arching. On one side it is growing convex while on the other side growing concave. It is just this special structural behavior that it make strucure rotating on the STL structure. So forces comming from the end block direction buckel the bout hspae that rotate and force down the other side. That make the C-bout beoming wider. So there arises in the dynamic state an alternating structural delection that make the instrument shorter and wider. Dr. Mark I am not a violin maker although I made quite a number of violins and viola. But all are made for finding proof on what the structure produces. All with 0,1 mm presession on arching shape with a by me constructed CNC routing equipment. That is the reason why you may read on my site Violin Structure and function. I once became interested in the function of the instrument. What I found show a solution based on simple geometry with lots of answer on 2D layout 3D shape and internal structural qualities. For that reason, i felt I had to make some instruments getting an answer if I am on the right track. I worked together with professional player and twice I worked with the Lund technical University. Holography and a Master degree (not me) that gave me proof that my assumptions are correct. The STL framework is stable and since it holds that function, we are able making the plates thinner without the risk that the collapse. In fact, we can improve on the playable instrument. Much has been on the table "WHAT DID STRAD" becoming able making thinner plates we do not today. Did he treat the wood or is it varnish. I say No it’s the structural shape of arching. Today quite a number of makers make perfect STL frame work and make their best instruments. So, it is with that background I liked to inform you all that I have find out. But GREAT Scientist show for me a contradiction in behavior it is not easy to convince you. I am sure about that I am correct. Their observations have become wrong since they involve Gravitation and support on moving structure when they make their observations. It is simple as that. You cannot force down the center of an octahedron with an inside column. That The Lund Technical University have given proof on and I believe the professors know what they do and accept from the boys that did their masters. I believe there once was a great intellectual person how could see all what I show now.
×
×
  • Create New...