Jump to content

Andreas Preuss

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Andreas Preuss

  1. This just confirms IMO quite visually what is important for a loud sound. High frequencies or overtones make the blend. My acoustic experiments on the new concept violin made a big leap to a functional violin sound when I managed to get more sound intensity between 2kHz and 4kHz.
  2. I have never seen that a sound post crack would develop on two grains simultaneously.
  3. Whatever they find. I’d say it’s by far more interesting to think about techniques of varnish application. This also answers partly what was made in which order and why.
  4. This throws everything back to the question what the human ear perceived as ‘loud’. Apparently there are frequency bands which contribute more to ‘loudness’ than others and that seems to be the simple reason why overtones are so important.
  5. I made it half through the video got extremely bored and then I channel hopped to the sound demonstration of mr. Langsather. He doesn’t even know the difference between Tchaikovsky and Massenet
  6. I would read it as FJK. In my database I could pull up three matches. Franz Joseph Klier Franz Joseph Koch Franz Joseph Kretschmer None of them has been reported in the literature to have used a brand stamp.
  7. No. Makes me wonder how the bridges of other candidates for the new design prize looked like. Regardless, congratulations to all.
  8. Regardless the chemical explanations, his claim to refine oil to a water like fluidity is correct. I tried it for the first time years ago with linseed as well as with walnut oil. Especially the walnut oil became very ‘thin’ after the treatment. Stored in a glass jar it kept fresh for 5 years now and didn’t form any skin on the surface or started to thicken. I couldn’t achieve the same results with water only.
  9. I am not so sure about this any more.
  10. For perfect symmetry the Markneukirchen method building from the back is better. Needs some training however.
  11. Depends what you define as ‘symmetric’. Makers if the past certainly had the intention to build symmetrical instruments but the baroque construction method limits a perfect control. (Technically speaking) Artistically speaking it forces the builder to create each time anew the impression of symmetry by eye. We might well ask ourselves how much symmetry is needed to produce ‘violin sound’? Or, couldn’t it be that absolute perfect symmetry rather prevents to achieve very particular sound characteristics?
  12. One thing which is very, very, very hard to imagine for us is a world without modern science.
  13. Hi David, Regardless I don’t see anywhere in the old times the obsession for precision we have nowadays.
  14. Especially if we consider that the ‘millimeter’ didn’t exist 300 years ago. We should learn how to square the circle.
  15. Hi Everyone, To make it short, for family reasons we decided to move away from Japan this month. Crazy family we are, we made the decision despite an ongoing pandemic and a war in Ukraine. I have already officially closed my business in April. But fortunately there is a young violin maker who will open his own business in the same workshop soon. In future I will work at home and I am looking forward to concentrate mostly on making new instruments. It might take a while until we are settled in our new home, so I won't be able to participate actively here for some month. (Not even answering on comments on this thread, with my apologies) (Heute ist nicht alle Tage, ich komm' wieder, keine Frage) - Andreas
  16. Not quite. I think Savart made the first observations on tap tones of Cremonese violins. Allegedly he had access to a few disassembled violins from the workshop of Vuillaume.
  17. Inquisitive minds try almost everything knowing that in the worst case the improvement gain is zero. Someone like Vigdorchik could promote himself only because nobody in the editorial staff of the Strad magazine would label his ideas as nonsense. Carleen Hutchins on the other hand is THE example for our belief that science is able to explain everything. It is this modern belief which created her so many followers. On the other hand the perception of ‘art’ has changed at the beginning of the 20th Century. ‘Beauty’ got redefined by theories about aesthetics, mostly in abstract and philosophical terms. (For example the ‘beauty’ of art works by Joseph Beuys lies in their abstract ideas.) I see there a Connection the violin world. The theory by Hutchins explains the ‘beauty’. And because the theory becomes more important than the skill to produce the artwork it distorts the reality about the ‘beauty’. We shouldn’t forget either that she had a kind of monopoly on acoustic theory. Other attempts were only misguided ideas to ‘improve’ her theory. Vigdorchik and his teacher Yavroi belonged to this group. (This seems to be the reason why many amateur makers are believers in her theory, and probably they are the majority.)
  18. I would rather put it like this A model which is unproven but works is by far better than a model which is proven but doesn’t focus on the essentials.
  19. I wouldn’t say that the bells of the cologne cathedral sound clanky. (And as far as I know they are one of the few ‘parts’ of the cathedral which hasn’t been replaced yet.)
  20. The problem here is that the end product doesn’t fail (1) if some debunked principles are used. The ‘better’ or ‘worse’ for violin sound is in certain terms very ambiguous. It seems that violin makers live in a world of who can ‘sell’ its own bias of ‘better sound’ best to their peers. And this has often vey ‘religious’ forms where ‘belief’ counts more than any ‘proof’. in such an environment it is clear that the search for ‘truth’ ends always in endless discussions between believers and disbelievers. ——————— (1) complete ‘failure’ would mean that the instrument would turn out to be mute. As we know this is never the case unless we make a solid brick.
  21. Apparently. There are examples where the construction almost collapsed. The cathedral in Amiens is one famous example. The constructors misestimated some static proportions. With scientific knowledge this can be predicted and therefore avoided. Some other ‘riddles’ also came from those constructions because they made things scientifically proven to be impossible. The famous cathedral in Chatres uses the squaring of the circle in some parts. While this is impossible in theoretic geometric terms, they had apparently approximative methods which were good enough.
  22. There are three manuscripts which could give hints wether or not makers in the golden age were using tap tones as a measure for quality control for the final tonal result: 1. I’ll manoscritto di Antonio Marchi 2. I segreti di Buttega by an unknown author. 3. Notes taken by Count Cozio di Salabue i don’t have really the time to scan through the texts once more, but to my memory none of those scriptures emphasizes the importance of tap tone pitch anywhere. And certainly none of those works deals with a larger scaled, complex tap tone theory of top and back. I find it rather interesting that Marchi starts his treatise actually with 3 chapters dealing with what could be considered as ‘acoustic science’. In there we find a description of how he thought the violin produces sound. Marchi explains it in a completely incomprehensible way. (Therefore I can’t even reconstruct from memory how he argued. It was something like ‘the string vibration excites the surrounding air, creating a resonance in the cavity which causes the bridge to vibrate.’) I would assume that he’d had written in the chapters about acoustics at least one sentence referring to tap tones of the finished plates if they were of such major importance. (I can’t remember that he did) When it comes to sound characteristics, March always argues from overall observations. High archings versus low archings, top plate thick in the center or not thick in the center, short versus long f holes etc etc. While it is clear that he favors the sound of Stainer above Stradivari and Guarneri, it doesn’t take anything away from how arguments related to sound were made in his days. We need to realize that our modern logic based on science didn’t exist. Modern makers try to predict from chosen parameters the final sound result. This is a purely scientific approach. Violin makers in the golden age tried to observe results by given (trigger) methods to arrive at an imagined sound result. This is actually the reverse of the scientific approach, but seems to be more successful. I call it the alchemical approach. Because it does not need to know why and how certain things are related to each other, it can better focus in practical terms on the final result. For a scientist the violin is complex because of the multi relatedness of scientific comprehensible parameters.
  23. I was actually talking about color going a few millimeters deep. (Mittenwald dealers washed their wood first with soap water and then put it on a sunny day on the lawn.)
  24. Well, responding to @TedN as well: Best artificial drying methods are those you can execute and control yourself. Regarding sound when choosing the neck wood, I’d say based on some experiments that the effect is zero. The most radical experiment I made was to use a pernambuco neck graft. The effect was literally zero. I myself would today definitely use kiln dried wood for the top plate. But again, I do it myself, and elaborated a process which seems to promising for some tonal advantages. For the back, I wouldn’t use kiln dried wood.
  25. If the drying in a kiln wasn’t done correctly, you should be able to see it at the color. If the outer layer is darker than the wood deeper inside, certainly something is wrong. Sometimes you have to look carefully because the difference is rather minimal.
  • Create New...