Guy Booth

Members
  • Content Count

    62
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Guy Booth

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Brothers in Arms. He hung himself.
  2. Wow. It must have been an experience to have spent time with him! I picture the instrument being of unknown origin, and played in the calloused hands of traveling gypsy musician as he walks along a moon-lit trail in Romania!
  3. Yes of course the original concert can move too. That goes without saying. I agree there is something profound in a moment that passes and is forever gone. But again, I see performance as and ‘act’ and a instrument as an ‘object’. A physical object can transition though time. A momentary act cannot. In that respect they are different entities.
  4. Yes very true. And that’s ok! In fact that’s something to embrace. ‘Art’ would remain stagnant otherwise. There are some songs that I associate with a time, place or person. There is a Dire Straits song that reminds me of my cousin who passed away. Of course this meaning that I attribute to that song has nothing at all to do with the original intention of the songwriter or time of recording. But that is part of the beauty of the arts is that we can attach our own meaning and importance to works - and subsequent renditions of them - and that meaning and importance is ‘true’ even if it has little in common with the original intentions and experiences of the work.
  5. I like wolves. Wild and undomesticated. Sings before the Full Moon.
  6. I’d have to think about it some more, so I may end-up contradicting myself later, but I don’t think the analogy quite works for a physical object (a musical instrument) doesn’t quite equate to a live performance. An instrument is an ‘object’ and performance is an ‘act’. I can play the same recording that was produced decades ago, over and over, and it still moves me. It was once a ‘real’ or live performance, but now it’s digital file or a copy, of that performance. It is wonderful see a live performance, but the ‘copy’ or recording can also be wonderful, even if now a reproduction.
  7. Awesome stuff Don! You’re at the point I’m aiming for - CNC followed by hand finishing. It’s going to take me years to get there so it’s inspiring to see your work in the meantime! I really like your approach. I’m also not keen on the idea of probing to generate a CAD model, there is no control in design doing it that way. For the same reason I’m also not keen how James Cherry produced violin arcings with Fusion360 in his video. There isn’t enough precision with Sculpt in Fusion as he showed, although I believe there is a ’snap-to’ function in Sculpt that may get the precision - I’m yet to try that. I chatted to James about it, and asking why not build a scaffold with t-splines then use Loft and Patch to complete the surface, but I didn’t understand why he thought that not possible. Maybe it can’t be done that way, but that’s the route I’m going. Any thoughts on that? Anyhow, looking forward to seeing more of your stuff down the line. Cheers.
  8. I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree! As I said, we all have our own definitions of what being original is, and what copying is. I feel I was in essence making a copy of a centuries old, standardized form in making a violin, even with my own mold design. Others may argue I was being original. In the end it boils down to personal definitions.
  9. If they were all painting the Mona Lisa, give or take a few millimeters, then I’d say they were producing copies. If they were painting something new and original, then I’d say they were being new and original.
  10. Scroll back a few pages, we’ve been furiously chatting about copy-carvers too! (Page 18).
  11. I totally agree. Violin makers have pretty much been pursuing the same ascetic, within a narrow range, for centuries. And that’s totally fine. If it works, keep doing it! I don’t see much creativity or originality in the act of making a violin, but there is a whole lot of technical skill and knowledge needed to make a great instrument. It seems to me creativity and originality are often frowned on by violin makers and players. Stain a violin blue and it’s an abomination, stain a guitar blue and it’s super cool! And yet some of the same makers who are aghast when traditional aesthetics and construction techniques are set-aside will then promote their one originality and creativity and claim they’re not making copies. Each to their own. If others feel it’s an inspiring act of originality and creativity to alter a violin mold by a few millimeters, and if they think such a small adjustment means they’re no longer copying a centuries old, standardized form, but being original, then so be it. We all have our own definitions of what being original is, and what copying is. The few violins I’ve made were based on my mold designs, but in essence I still feel they are copies of a generic form. But depending on the context, I also think making a ‘copy’ is as worthy as being ‘original’. Indeed making something that has been made for centuries is a wholesome, if not a soulful, way to connect with traditions.
  12. Thanks...why do you like it raised on the belly - you raise it then varnish it? Sorry if it’s a silly question. Thanks, makes sense!
  13. I think that’s an excellent way of putting it!
  14. I guess I’ve hurt the feelings of a few Gouges and Chisels too then!