Andreas Preuss

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Andreas Preuss

  • Rank
    humble craftsman

Contact Methods

  • Yahoo

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

3180 profile views
  1. and after the Cannon they are still getting even angrier. If you are making the Ole Bull you have to wear dark sunglasses or you won't stand the anger.
  2. I was wondering if this wasn't the attempt to transform a medio fino type cello with a scratched purfling into a Carlo Antonio Testore who often used an eagle brand (completeley different though) Then, presumably this was done before picture informaton could easily be exchanged.
  3. Because of my own name I made once an internet search on 'prussian eagle'. It seems that in heraldic terms there is a difference between open wings and a sort of standing wings. All pictures of a prussian eagle I found had standing wings. Besides that the eagle was holding a scepter and an imperial orb in its claws. (could have been omited on a brand that size.)
  4. I might have only some of the look alikes and bought them at HomeDepot before departing to Japan. I experienced a similar problem with a tool search (forgot what exactly it was) and in the end I figured out that my better version must have been more expensive to manufacture, thus it was discontinued.
  5. Now I know Sagmir Sonstwas, Geigen und Lauterzeug Macher, in Mitimwahn an der Irrsinn.
  6. Wasn't there a Sebastian Schelle somewhere? However, no idea if this fits.
  7. Thinking of German abbreviations with SS all sorts of things come to mind and some vulgar words made me laugh hard...
  8. Couldn't agree more. This is the very reason why my rule number one for changeing the design was: 'If a violinist steps out on the stage people in the audience in the first row should not be able to notice a difference.' My 'hero' in the field of successful form inventions is Hiroshi Iizuta who created his own fabulous viola model which got accepted by quite a number of viola players.
  9. Actually, yes this sounds about right for the recurve of the cross arching at the C bouts. Though we could go into a lengthy discussion if bending the wood wasn't the reason for curtate cycloid curves in the classical archings, which have a much wider radius there than modern violins. Anyway, what I see in most bending techniques is a sort of instant bending. I am inclined to think that a very slow bending (something which might take a whole day or even more) is less likely to fail even for a structure like a violin arch with curves and recurves.
  10. That's exactly what I want try to find out. And therefore there are two options: you start with a normal violin and thin it down in certain areas to find out any differences or you go the other way and make it too light and eventually too thin and flimsy and see where the addition of mass (or rather stiffness) makes an audible difference. It's in the end like the 'gluey' experiment Sam Zygmontovitch has done before. I don't see mass as a 'problem'. When I started this project it was anyway only my intention to play around with the goal of light weight and see what is coming up. However, now that I made this violin sound already pretty good, I am thinking also about a sound calibration system with small weights and would assume a rather light violin is more sensitive for doing this. Violin Restoration has added so many techniques to our repertoire and why not use it to make new instruments in combination with new materials. For the design, we should keep in mind that classical design patterns of Stradivari and Guarneei were made for music which didn't go beyond 5th position (not quite sure) but certainly did not use very high positions. I find it a sort of strange that this is accepted just with the argument 'there can't be any improvement.' I am saying 'yes there can be a better design, if we manouever cautiously to keep the balance between aesthetical appearance and acoustical necessities. I can only say that so far all violinists who thouched the super light violin liked the dropping shoulder and that the body feels short and handy. (The outline is diagonally in that direction 4mm shorter making it 347mm, that's almost 10mm less than a Strad pg model) Lets see...
  11. Hmmm, the pyramids and some violins share the same fate of man-made mysteries.
  12. I think this is open for test and trial. I would see bare gut strings played with a light bow as the key element for 'baroquish sound' If you are playing in a group, I would first try to change strings and bow, leave the modern bridge and see (or rather hear) if you can blend in with the other players. That's certainly not a solution if other members of the group are 'baroque puritans' and wouldn't allow such an instrument.
  13. I hate revolutions! Fortunately a Dutch rescue team saved the scattered pieces of the recordings and videos and is now rebuilding the baroque sound.
  14. On a general scheme it looks like this: When first finished the super light violin it was 317g, sound extremely woofy and basically unplayable. First change to improve sound: reducing weight of the back from the outside: No major changes weight around 295g. Second change: setting extremely heavy fernambuko neck. Weight c. 327g. No major improvements. Third change: Back to normal sized linings on the topside. Can't remember exactly the weight but something like 2-3G more. (At the same time some of the vertical rib bracings came off and I didn't put them back) First major sound improvement. Still a boxy sound but playable. Fourth change: Doubling the linings. The first change which went away from 'normal' violin making practices. Sound improved to almost normal. Weight at c. 332g. Fifth change: going back to a lightweight neck to reduce weight. No sound improvement expected. Weight down to c. 300g. 6th change: installing the Bayon bar adding 2g. No real improvement. More a shift of sound to more 'roundness'. 7th change: installing the cross bar. For what reason ever no measurable weight change. Boxiness somehow completely gone. Sound still on the dark side but with more grit (overtones). Summary: all significant changes stiffened the cross grain direction of the top. If the violin body is too loose in that direction it results in an unfocused boxy and woofy sound. At the same time this seems to prevent a good overtone range, but seems not to be entirely responsible for the optimal distribution of overtones. Right now there are two things I have in mind: correct the thickness of the back. There is a good chance that by thinning it down from the outside I went too far in the c bout region. So I would glue some patches there. Secondly make a bent top. This is more on the scheme same stiffness with less weight. Right now the top is 67g and it is even with a carved plate possible to get down to 60g (with BB). So maybe a bent plate can come down to 55g. Besides that there are a few changes playing around with some features: x shaped bass bar (I call it the spider bass bar) and adding a second cross bar below the ff. For both I expect however no dramatic changes for sound. I am not a motorcycle fan but maybe in the history of motorcycle engineering the weight of the flywheel changed by accelerating its rotation speed? In the end I can't abandon necessary structural elements on the violin neither but recalibrate the entire body for the same sound functionality. To take the example of the motorcycle I suppose that a higher flywheel rotation results in different driving properties. (Faster acceleration?) Addition: Being now down at 302g and having a violin of a functional sound it is the question if really 70g of additional mass is needed to make it sound really good. I guess not. What would be your guess?