Nick Allen

Holy necropost, OP. This might be a new record for this godforsaken site lol.

You guys very well (probably) are right. The maple might have been selected for just this thing. I acquired it from an estate from a European violin maker who croaked. The thing that is leading me down this path is that I think that perhaps the role of environmental pollutants is a bit overlooked? I mean, can we imagine what tonal properties that nicotine, tobacco tar and borax impart on truly old tone wood that has undergone the inevitable chemical and structural changes that it does to maybe be a piece of the puzzle of the sound that many are after? Perhaps some experimentation is in order?

Hiya, I was thinking about old wood. I've been working and observing old maple and spruce for a while now, and I've been gathering some general observations about it that may misguided or perhaps there is a small chance that it's on to something? One thing that I've noticed in my old stock maple, roughly 100 years aged, is that it's very light, and has a very lively tap sound. It's higher pitched on average and seems to spring off of the wood more readily and ring out longer. I don't think that this is a controversial statement. My newer maple, within 10-20 years, seems to be less lively and heavier, a bit stodgy. I think obviously this is because the volatiles and resins have been naturally removed from the older wood, which reduces dampening. And the remaining sugars crystalize, giving it a snappy property. The new stuff has more "stuff" in it and doesn't move as freely, it seems. But what I've been really thinking about is, that perhaps the old wood that occupies genuine old corpuses has this low density, low dampening property, but at the same time, perhaps environmental pollutants and treatments are causing a very desirable dampening to the sound, which sort of modifies the higher overtones in a very pleasant way, but doesn't really dampen the instrument at large? Basically also allowing the overtones that cut and carry to persist? With the newer maple and spruce, perhaps it doesn't have the dual action of springy, lively wood and pleasant dampening from additives either accidental or natural, such as nicotine, tobacco tar and chemical and mineral preservatives? Has anyone thought about this kind of thing? I'm sure it's been talked out quite a bit, maybe...

Hey guys, So I've been on a journey to upgrade my old eBay finger planes I got ten years ago. They still work fine, but I've been taking my investment into my toolset much more seriously lately, and am looking at different plane sets. The best finger planes that I've ever used were a set of the old Gewa ones. With the elliptical footprint and rosewood wedges. I know they aren't made anymore, but I'm wondering if anyone knows if anyone is selling some or where I might be able to find a lead on some? I know it's a long shot, but any info would go a long way and be appreciated. Thanks!

As Don said, just give it time. I just finished one and was not impressed with the sound initially, but it's shaping up to be one of my best sounding with each passing day and some setup tweaks and playing in. See how it sounds a month from now.

Not really. I still use the spreader. Here is an example with a violin bridge... You can see the gap that tapers to the middle, with the corners touching. Now you can see it closing, with the bridge tipped lightly forward. I can still tip it a little more to close the very tips, as they will also be trimmed anyways here. But you get the idea?

Hmm. Did you spring the feet? That technique usually counteracts this phenomenon. Basically, you fit the feet so that there is a small, controlled tapered gap from outer corner to inner corner on each foot. Then, when string pressure is applied, the feet lock in and the gaps close. The way to do this kind of fit is to make sure your outer edges are sitting flush and square, and then tip the bridge towards either the fingerboard or the tailpiece, and observe the gap on that respective side. If it fits, the gap will close like a zipper to the inner tip of the foot.

This all makes sense to me, actually. I'll have to try a new bridge with a thicker waist and general heft and trim it slowly with a good player's help with each iteration until we land on the best balance and leave it. I have an unfortunate disease where I just can't stop messing with my violins and I never feel as though they are done, even when they totally are.

Hi, So I recently finished a violin. A small DG model that really packs a punch. When I first strung it up, I was a little disappointed, as I thought the G wasn't ballsy enough for my taste. But, as it settled and was played for a while, it came into its own. If I could describe the instrument's timbre, it's very punchy, but has that certain sepia quality that you'd expect from older stuff. So I was pretty happy at that point. Cut to today, where stupid me though that he'd be clever and took the bridge off and opened the kidneys up quite a ways and thinned the waist to 15, a-la some Renee Morel bridge. I thought to myself that this would be a great idea, as the blank I used was an old Deluxe from 1975, and was super strong, and you could barely bend it between your fingers even after cutting it. Like the old stuff. So I had a good player play it after this, and I noticed that the sound kind of changed in a less than predictable way. What I thought would happen was the whole instrument opening up further, feeling more oomph and explosiveness off of the bow, but instead, the G kind of died, and the high end tightened up even further than I wanted. What it did gain was response and speed, though. But it lost that nostalgic clarity that people seemed to love about it. So I'm going to cut a new bridge that was the same measurements as the first, to see if it will retain some of that quality. Has anyone here has a similar experience, with the breadth on the G kind of fading when removing mass from the bridge by thinning the waist and expanding the kidneys? Is there something that should usually happen here? Am I a simpleton? Any experience or insight would be appreciated. Thanks!

I agree. A regular seam only needs about an hour, or even 40 minutes at minimum to set. But I like two at minimum. End blocks are as crucial as the center seam and neck set to me, so yes, overnight.

Ugh. I know. Problem is, this particular violin has a tiny lower eye and shallow ribs, so you can't even fit it through the lower eye! Like, they eye is physically wide enough to fit the post, but there's not enough depth to angle the sound post in anyways. I determined that this violin does not deserve a normal sound post and just planed two flats on either side of the post and slipped it in that way...

I can understand that you have a thought out reason, which I can respect. Do you, and other makers for that matter, not expect someone to drill through your narrow F hole in frustration with a 6.5mm post in the future? Or is it just not a concern? Idk. Also, is your line of thinking that narrower holes and a skinny post are better for sound?

As you can sort of guess, I'm currently fitting a post into a really expensive modern violin. And the F holes are less than 6mm wide at the notches. Now we've all been there, and cursed the maker's name while trying to stab the post while it's in the lower eye, also trying not to mung the edge of the eye. And we just suffer through it to make it happen. It takes longer to fit a post and is just annoying, frankly. When I make a fiddle, I make sure that I can at least slip a 6.5mm post through. I prefer to use 6.2 but that's not important here. Is there some kind of acoustic or historic reason for this? Am I crazy for being driven crazy by this? Probably? I understand that it's not a big issue for makers who make 10 sound posts per year, but it's a major annoyance for people who have to do ten sound posts per week. I can't tell if I'm just venting or curious or both...

Yeah. I know what you mean. By "ripples" I kind of just mean those sort of microscopic aberrations when you sight down the board with a light source on the other end. Not really topographical features. But the feathery ones that you can only see if you put a piece of grid paper on the bridge end of the FB and look down.

Which I have recently learned can be fixed with either calcium acetate or aluminum acetate to help with fading problems. Both of those chemicals can fix the quinone color to the cellulose in the wood, greatly strengthening the colorfastness of the nitrite treatment, as it tends to lighten after a few years without stabilization.