Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Andreas Preuss

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Andreas Preuss

  1. You know, judges need to work from a fixed idea what they like and what not in the framework of the competition. Otherwise they won’t get anywhere in the limited time they have to get to a result. I was in my post just trying to figure out what possibly could have lost points on an otherwise flawless cello. There is always a sort of disappointment when one feels that one has not been judged fairly. What is important to remember is that the criteria of the judges might be different from your own. This doesn’t make a good instrument worse than it is. Luck is necessary too, wishing all the best luck for the next time, especially because I see someone who can look on his own work with some critical distance.
  2. Makers of the past tell us stories about how misleading the term ‘tonewood’ became through commercial interests. Tonewood is spruce for the top which governs most of the ‘tone’. The rest is, if not completely different in physical properties, pretty much a matter of choice. Different species of willow, beech, chestnut, aspen, poplar are all useable for cellos as some pretty famous makers of the past demonstrated to us. And more often those woods have flaws like knots and other irregularities. You should ask a wood dealer, but maybe when cutting up a maple trunk chances for unforeseen surprises are maybe smaller. I used as a quick test on my new concept violin a flat walnut board for the back and got a surprising good sound.
  3. I understand David ATs post as one sample note of several which have to be examined. Sound quality, and that’s the topic of the thread, is perceived on single notes and I find the entire spectrum by impact hammer or glissandi or from a bowed half note scale often confusing. And I assume that if you have for example a ‘smoky’ character in the D string there must be a method which can show this by selecting one note on the D string. Besides that there are some people claiming to know all by only playing the Open G string. What I am looking for is a sort of combination method to examine different aspects: the whole spectrum bowed and impact which tells some spots to look at in close up, maybe notes around a deep valley and notes around a high peak. In the end, what is absolutely important when we work with acoustic examination tools, we have to find out what can trigger the spectrum in certain directions to achieve the sound we have in mind.
  4. Why is that so? I remember that some scientific research was looking on 1/3 or 1/4 bands to describe sound characteristics. And if i understand Dunnwalds research correctly this is as well looking on averages in the higher frequency bands and only in the lower region on single peaks of the signature modes. For my own part I was sometimes setting audacity resolution rather low in order to get a clearer view what the human ear perceives in the high frequencies, because at least I think we can’t hear single peaks.
  5. Nice clean work. To put myself under the hat of a juror I’d need more pictures. i agree that the ff look a kind of weak a bit x-leg-ish, pegbox from the side somehow the volute lacks a bit of ‘weight’ and the recurve towards the neck (seen from the side) is too much for my taste. Varnish applied nicely, but looks a bit opaque on the pictures. On the point scale I’d guess you landed somewhere at 80/100 〜85/100 for workmanship. But you know, so much depends on the composition of the jury. I think for the Triennale it is really best just to get as close as possible to the taste of an original Strad (maybe except for a violas)
  6. Sorry, I am a little handicapped when it comes to computer stuff. i know excel, and I know that you can export audacity data to excel, but how can I make 1/12 filter? (Or is ‘filter’ averaging the data over the bandwidth of respective half notes?) I would like to try this and probably other averages on different frequency bandwidths.
  7. That’s a mental thing. You can hate any aspect of making an instrument unless you figure out the way it works for you well. Long ago I hated to make the purfling……
  8. Looks like a bit of work but might be worth the effort. What sort of software are you using?
  9. I think this is the right logic. However, I would seal maple parts but just differently from spruce.
  10. I would construct it like this: Since the dots and the silver pen line align very well they must have come From a pattern. I assume that Strad wouldn’t make a pattern from scratch but just take an existing rib garland for this. It is clear too that you won’t do it with ink because it would stain the rib garland. working from the points and the silver pen line you can connect them with straight ink lines between the dots but it looks nicer if they are not connected. The silver line alone would be too weak. Logic?
  11. Then no Strad without patching would sound good? I’d be curious to know in which condition the best sounding strads are right now. Heavier and longer bass bars are a kind of better tires on otherwise well tuned sports car. You forgot to mention the new and longer neck which has a much bigger influence on the sound than a new bass bar. Instead of repeating this endless discussion, c’mon let’s have beer in the pub around the corner and let’s talk about something else.
  12. Sometimes I really DO hate French polish. Besides the spelling of my name is Andreas, there is no ‚u‘.
  13. I am pretty sure that strads which have been patched up on the top in larger areas (or, much more than a sound post patch) have not any more their original sound potential. Listening tests by Fritz et al. unfortunately didn’t disclose the condition of Strads participating in the test.
  14. You mean the very end down there? I use a very sharp 6mm flat and long chisel. It takes maybe 5-10 minutes to cut it clean from where you are.
  15. I don’t really get what is so ‘fascinating’ about this scroll other than completely out of proportion. I am not saying that a scroll must look like made by a robot and clean like hell (actually not what I like either). I find it fascinating if a scroll looks a kind of wild but has some unwinding force and vigor in its appearance. More than often those scrolls still follow proportions.
  16. What is ‘exactly’? we judge Strads solely on their tonal merits and I suppose nobody knows on which standards Strad based his production. I dare to say that ‘sound’ was most likely not the number one on his priority list. On the level of craftsmanship he had very high standards which were always the same (even when he used cheaper wood) but there are of course and naturally variations.
  17. Worse than that. replaced by touch up and zillions of polish layers.
  18. The shadow drawing you see, couldn’t this be a drawing on the other side of the paper?
  19. Good grief! You must be pretty fresh in the violin trade. ‘Neapolitan school’ is often used by ‘clever sellers’ for be all violins with a sort of greenish ground and built on a stradish model. I once helped a frauded customer who had bought a as Pistucci relabeled Czech factory instrument. We won the case but not as easy as I had thought. Presumably the judge didn’t know anything about instruments and rather tried to figure out the truth from the logic of argumentation in both sides.
  20. Yes, should be perfect in most methods. To check it I hook up one side in the bench and put the other half on top of it, move it in different positions, also diagonally and always flip the second half 180 degrees to make the same checks. During my journeyman’s years I have learned several techniques. 1. clamping the wood in the bench and pushing the plane over it. (Can be done with pulling a Japanese plane as well) Probably the most common method. Beginners struggle often because they don’t have a good foot position and loose the body balance to use the plane. It can also happen that the surface is not in an right angle to the surface. There are two possible goals with this method a. Making a perfect flat fit (good joiner plane needed) b. Making an even round curve on both sides creating a gap and is done with a Stanley block plane. (A method I learned in Hungary) it is the clamped in a bench with the ‘hammering technique’. (That’s a bit difficult to explain in detail.) 2.clamping the joiner plane in the bench and pushing the wood over it. 3. On a Japanese shooting board the wood is made flat on the side facing ribs and put on the board. A Japanese plane is pulled (not pushed as you might know) over the surface to be joint. 4. the same as 3 but with a European plane which is pushed. 5. Several years ago I made a cello and didn’t have a good joiner plane. So I made it with a Mittenwald type tooth plane and clamped it together with much pressure. I thought I’d see a black line from top to bottom when finished but it was by far better than I expected. In some areas there were slim black lines. Supposedly this joint holds better than a flat joint because both surfaces are interlinked.
  21. Don, thanks for continuing the discussion. I have for everyone interested, a recording which I can PM.
  22. Maybe the only thing which can be objectified is sound projection or carrying power. And as we know from instruments past and present this does not boil down to exactly the same overall sound characteristics.
  23. I remember talks with my father, a physicist, who always showed me the latest articles on violins he found. (He was the type of guy spending hours in the library of the research center to hunt for information in an age where the internet didn’t exist. He did it mostly for his own research but apparently once in a while he was in the mood to hunt for other stuff) And then he always came to me showing the most recent ‘exciting’ findings about violin sound or in this case the AI approach. And always my question to him was ‘Any idea how to make this?’ He would then shrug his shoulders and say ‘no idea’ This leads me logically to the only conclusion that we need ‘procedure oriented research’. Change things on an instrument and see or rather hear what changed. I am trying to do my small contribution with the new concept (super light?) violin. —————————————— When reading ‘Il manoscritto di Giovanni Antonio Marchi’ it is full of observations what properties have what influence on the sound. And though it is not scientific, it reminds me at times on Don Noons analysis talking about ‘low string response’ ‘mid range’ etc. in the language of the 18th century. Though Marchi wasn’t the peak of violin making (probably because Stainer was his hero) it gives a glimpse on ‘procedure oriented sound calibration’ in the workshops back then. (Or learning by trial and error about arching thicknesses and material) In any case the ‘science’ in those days was alchemy, and despite its obvious shortcomings it had a highly developed approach to compare observations on procedures with the outcoming results. That’s mostly what we need to make better instruments. For the AI approach I would at least hope that it can figure out what happens if you change which thing on a simulated model. This won’t give a complete answer on how to build good sounding instruments but hopefully prevent to think in wrong directions or show where alterations simply don’t matter so much. In this context I wouldn’t be surprised if such a model would show that some traditional beliefs are by far less important than other things nobody ever thought of.
  24. If this discussion is not going back to the original topic I’ll ask Jeffrey to close it.
  • Create New...