Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

...

Members
  • Posts

    144
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

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

...'s Achievements

Member

Member (3/5)

  1. ...

    ......

    Here is my first draft. Though of course I didn't take my plate thickness into account. So it was an interesting 3am bedtime. I may have to start over or live with 16mm plates instead of 13mm...... It must have been the acid?
  2. ...

    ......

    Bah hahaha. He's going to love my dremel tool
  3. ...

    ......

    As soon as I can find the acid for proper navel gazing I will let you know. Im designing my own. It will take time. My shapes and stuff aren't coming from Google and FedEx..... I'll post my back arching on my other post when I get back from church today. Sorry. Plus I have no wood. Or decent gouges. I have a nice dremel set if you prefer my first violin to look like I pulled it from a plastic bin? But thank you for the encouragement. I like your style. Step 1 acid........step 2........more acid.....
  4. ...

    ......

    That's plausible. I already have my bridge location and is how you use the Guadagnini method to find the f hole location, though I think stradivari and Guarneri also used the same or very similar methods. I was thinking about making my holes 1mm thinner and 2mm longer for the same reason. One thing I haven't read here is talk about measurements from the violin level. Its the difference in distance of a square between the upper and lower bouts. I have it marked on my violin plan anyway I found it interesting that the top of my inner top f holes hit that mark by chance. There could be a connection there. I don't know what that would be but it's interesting to note. Its marked vl on my plan just above 184
  5. ...

    ......

    I see what you're saying. Well that's an entirely different can of worms isn't it. I had not considered them being too wide in width they are right at 7.5mm at their widest point. Is this too wide? I can make them narrower........
  6. ...

    ......

    Nah not within reason. It would cost me in gas than what I would spend on ordering some. Even then I don't know what I'm looking for. In the model world we use a lot of spruce and maple but it has all been kiln dried. I have a source for my other wood like tail piece and pegs Mesquite is plentiful here but it is very dense almost like ebony.
  7. ...

    ......

    Well to be fair he and I reconciled and are on speaking terms for what its worth. I understand the practical application but when it's discussed in theory as far as sound you can actually hear in our range what could it hurt if they are an acceptable length in any case? my f holes are probably 3 to 5mm longer but still well within the limits of "traditional" compared to the most extreme examples. The curve itself is what makes the holes longer so why not twist a straight f hole to achieve the same result? My f holes are simply the same length of a Guarneri yet they are within the dimensions of a Stradivari. I think that perhaps the solution was just never realized or the reason why it doesn't work has been lost? In any case. I have a theory I'm going to stick with it. The worst that can happen is it doesn't sound good. A lot of work goes into a violin. Much much more than I realized when I decided to pursue the project. However each step has given better understanding and now I'm on to arching that Don has been helping me with so as far as that is concerned...... But I agree I was a total ass. But also defend my right to be unique and try new things no matter what. After talking very briefly with Don about arching I'm going with his advice and going to keep it relatively mellow. And go with an asymmetrical design. Meaning one side will be more curved than the other favoring the treble side. I think this approach will go well with my exaggerated c bouts...... While he wouldn't agree for one of his violins I get that. Im not building for anyone but myself....... As I have no control over my wood selection anyway there's no point in worrying about it. It's going to be what it is and trying to conform to an unknown is impossible anyway. All I can do is arch to my preference of what I think will sound good and graduate my plates as needed.
  8. ...

    ......

    @Mike Atkins this is where I got my bass bar placement
  9. ...

    ......

    @Mike Atkins here. Did you watch the video on f hole placement you can see where I came up with this solution. While I agree it's cutting it close I'm told it is the correct way.
  10. ...

    ......

    im letting my bass bar determine my f hole spacing as it is the only feature that comes close to dictate such. Im going to be happy with 42mm I may go 43mm but that is just a personal preference. I will absolutely have to cut into my bass bar in either case but to me 42 could be beneficial too because I am cutting into my bass bar more making my plate weaker but also allows it to move more. I think there is something to that. My strad has no notch in the bass bar but it is the exact same measurements we are accepting as standard. But my strad is a German copy made by who knows? However Edgar russ is pretty certain my bass bar should be 19.5 mm from the center at the bridge. Give me a second I'll post a picture of my design as I have it now.
  11. ...

    ......

    @Mike Atkins https://onebiteblog.com/finding-the-missing-bullet-holes/ This story comes to mind
  12. ...

    ......

    Agreed. But a beneficial trade off doesn't mean it mitigated a specific target. I think various instruments may have been targeting one sound over the other with the wood they had on hand. How they determine that is beyond me. They definitely didn't say this will sound quite lovely in 500 years for now its firewood. But to your point about accepting accounts of what has been heard now to what was heard back then. The best sounding instruments were probably well used and are now long gone. Making for nobility and highly acclaimed players is one thing but if thats all you got Pedro on Cremona lane didn't care who or what his instrument sounded like as long as people threw coins in his hat. And that instrument is long gone......
  13. ...

    ......

    I see one guarneri at about 43mm and heights at 13mm thank you for catching that. That will be a neat feature to stick it to the man when I start building. "The man" being nobody just my own demons I guess. Lol
  14. ...

    ......

    oh I see what you're saying. You're saying the length of the curve is dictating the distance in 3 dimensions not 2 like what I have drawn. Yeah that makes sense. Definitely the distance is longer because of the 3rd axis. I think that would depend on how the strad was measured to begin with. My ruler isn't very flexible so its only accurate on a flat plane. Bending it is only distorting the measurements not actually calculating them. I agree that is definitely something to keep in mind when laying them out. Ide imagine he probably just did his best at what he had at the time. Keeping in mind the millimeter or inch as we know it hadn't been invented yet and any notion of such wasn't standardized for at least 150 years after. I think even as recent as 2018 or something the millimeter was still being disputed for its actual physical length. I think I remember them changing it when they changed the kilo just recently? Not that it matters for our discussion but the guy was only human. And unless he used the same exact ruler every time there would be no way to reliably make the same measurements within the tolerance we are talking about unless he used some sort of metal or wood jig and even those and your ruler can change with moisture or temperature. As an aircraft mechanic who made his living measuring to the .001 of an inch...... I can tell you I've made airplane parts in the morning that were too small in the afternoon...... I highly highly doubt any masters were concerned with that amount of accuracy. I don't see why we would be today.... they weren't back then. Not to say it couldn't be done but it probably wasn't. And we would have had things like the internal combustion engine 2000 years ago not 150..... I think we often confuse master skill with precision and the two aren't ambiguous. I can make airplane parts to within .006 of an inch all day with out the help of anything but a micrometer and file by hand all day. That doesn't make mean its precise. Keeping in mind most airplane parts are controlled to +or- .001 of an inch that doesn't make it so after human factor and it is accountable and a known value. But we have much better rulers now.......
  15. ...

    ......

    I currently have no wood. So maybe I'm designing for a parameter that is yet to be fulfilled? I don't want to spend a bunch of time making arching templates that aren't compatible with my wood that I have no control over anyway. But with that said... I have no control over my wood so why would the arching style matter? I will just have to compensate for it anyway. Interesting to note though that arching started quite tall in Amati's time and gradually reduced. Guarneri's best violins have an arch of around 13 or 14 mm strad settled on 15 or 16? But could that all be due to the selection of wood available?
×
×
  • Create New...