rottrunner

Members
  • Content Count

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About rottrunner

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1066 profile views
  1. I do think amplification is quite common now, at least it is at the Chicago Symphony. Although I've never experience quite as substantial a difference in power from concert to concert. I do agree with many on here that it's impossible to compare instruments in such an uncontrolled environment, but it was also a distinct enough experience that I do think there was some serious projection missing from that instrument. Capuçon is definitely a violinist that plays between loud and louder, as someone else mentioned. I wonder if it's stylistic, a lack of dynamic skill, or because his instrument would be nearly unheard if he played more softly.
  2. "Directional" is a really good way to phrase that. The Panette was most certainly that -- I could hear each note so clearly if he was pointed directly in my direction, but there was no power. It barely broached the volume level of "normal" when I was directly in its sound path.
  3. That's really interesting -- thanks, DGV!
  4. I'd always heard the general, unscientific opinion that Guarneris are rather quiet relative to Strads. I figured it was more a matter of fluid opinion, which it still is, but having just heard a Guarneri played live, there's a significant difference. I've seen Itzhak Perlman play his Soil Strad, Gil Shaham play the Polignac Strad, Anne Sophie Mutter play the Emiliani Strad, and even Hilary Hahn's Cannone copy. But I just recently saw Renaud Capuçon play Brahms, and the entire time I kept thinking, "what is that thing? You can barely hear it." Turns out it was the Panette Guarneri. It had absolutely no projection -- there may as well have been a mute on it. Tonally it's beautiful. But gosh, it would be prettier if you could hear it. If he wasn't facing directly at your section of the audience, you had to really work to hear the notes. I sit in the same seats for almost every concert (except I was in the balcony for Itzhak). Main floor, stage right, 8 rows from the stage. The difference in sound was amazing. Just wanted to share my epiphany.
  5. What kind of blade is your go-to for scrollwork, purfling, other shaping/carving? There seem to be some pretty strong opinions out there, and I'd like a few good options.
  6. Thanks, Don. =) I did consider that, but it's really, surprisingly stable (and heavy!). We do have some extraordinarily windy days in my town though, so there will likely be times when suntanning will have to wait. Clearly, I should just move to windless, rainless, birdless island for this.
  7. Since I'm home today and there's supposed to be no rain, I'm giving it a trial run without the top on. There's no plate on the bottom either, so I think that should be sufficient.
  8. Michael, I have no idea. It's a cheap violin in experimenting on, and it came with those dots stamped onto the fingerboard surface.
  9. Michael, does plexiglass "hold" or "collect" infrared radiation? I wasn't able to find any specific information about that.
  10. I did leave the bottom open for ventilation, and considered cutting some small vents out of the bottom edges of the sides. I'm going to give it a try for a few days and see if it starts getting to hot or humid on the inside, and if it does, I'll chop some chunks out. I usually like to turn the violins rather than use reflection, only because I'm worried one side will somehow get darker than the other.
  11. So I've been wanting to give darkening via suntanning a go rather than tea stain, but Chicago's notoriously unpredictable weather has made things difficult. Now that we're out of the season of blizzards, I'm hoping that on allegedly sunny days I can stick this baby outside while I'm at work, and if there's a slight drizzle, nothing will get damaged. I'm really hoping it will turn out well. I just snagged some non-UV blocking acrylic/plexiglass sheets, brackets, a drill bit for plastics, and some screws from McMaster-Carr, and voila! I need to seal the holes where the strings go in so any rogue raindrops won't drip down directly onto the violin. Other than that, I think it will do well for small, unexpected weather problems. Thoughts?
  12. I'd be interested to get some opinions about WHY this is bad. Everyone has consistently said, "bad idea," "I don't do this anymore," etc., but can anyone explain why?
  13. Surprisingly, though, the depth and brilliance of the flames and wood grain is still gorgeous -- really refractive. I honestly thought the water glass would dull it.
  14. I work for a fairly well-known industrial supplies distributor, so even if I can't get something from work, I can usually find a supplier who has the things I need (i.e. Ferric chloride). But yes, I agree with everyone here that it's definitely the wrong yellow. Luckily, the violin was cheap, and the outside is still white. anyone have any other suggestions on what you used right after the water glass was applied? A dear friend of mine is a chemist, and after some research she and I decided that potassium silicate, followed by a wash of calcium hydroxide (lime) would seal the wood, and also waterproof/fireproof it. We knew it might have a detriment to the sound if it was too hard a substance, but it will be interesting to see what happens in the name of science. The ferric chloride was meant to get rid of the buildup from the calcium reaction, as well as stain the wood. Don was right, it's definitely far too dark now. I might experiment with diluting the ferric chloride on some scraps. Definitely a fun experiment, but I don't think it's one I'll work with again. Now I know.
  15. Interestingly, after letting it sit for about 3 hours, it's already darkened a shade or two closer to what I was hoping for in the beginning. Blind beginner's luck? Maybe it just needed extra time to "process?"