Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'acoustics'.
Found 5 results
-
The Tale of the TAILPIECE, a History of this small accessory From Medieval times right up to the present day, a History of this violin family, small accessory. English and French version are there, on Academia.edu: http://univ-montp2.academia.edu/EricFouilh%C3%A9
-
Regardless if (or if not) the ground is the magic trick to get the ultimate sound (are we talking about secrets??), I prefer to think about it like what can the ground do and what it can’t do in relation to the sound. And for making a discussion as focused as possible I want to limit it to the top plate assuming that it has there most impact. (Note: please no discussion about wood treatment, that’s something different) While a good ground can enhance the optical impression of the color varnish, this does not necessarily mean that it works best for the acoustics. I am not interested here in the Cremonese ground or other old recipes. (We assume it is the best ground we can get, but is there any real evidence for it?) I am more interested in a general view. So I am asking myself a few questions. 1. How does the sound change with a hard ground versus a soft ground? There are some pretty intriguing statements. No one less than Roger Hargrave says that since he is using the POP ground he is not afraid any more that his violins have no (good) projection in a hall. (And he is certainly someone who knows what he is talking about) Soft ground materials like propolis seem to have lost focus in the violin world. 2. Does weight matter, or can we ignore it, because it is insignificant? If I try for example the extreme case of using a lead pigment what would this do? (In practical terms it would be possible to cook Massicot (lead orange) in linseed oil to dissolve it entirely.) It seems that some modern noise absorbing varnishes use heavy ingredients to absorb engine sound from cars. So would a heavy ground rather risk to mute the sound? Or could certain formulas filter part of the spectrum? Then it would be desirable to filter a region that should be rather low, the nasal Formant for example. 3. if the ground is not only in the wood but raises above (presumably making the halo effect) what happens then? And in theory if we would just continue and make the ground very thick so that it reaches the weight of the ungrounded plate? (Would be intriguing to think that the thickness would have a certain desirable effect.) 4. Would it make a difference if the plate is sandwiched in between the ground which means the same ground is applied in the inside of the instrument too? Or, if the ground is only on one side, does this create an ‘imbalance’ for the vibrating plates? 5. Last not least the penetration into the wood should in theory make a difference. We could see it as an anchor effect. For example it should make a difference how much glue is thinned down if it is applied as a ground. (And can have pretty attractive looking results too) 6. And one more: is there any (fundamental?) difference between mineral, resinous, glue based, emulsion or oil ground? And for minerals, dies size of the particles matter? (In theory a Nano particle filler should be somewhere different to much bigger particles, not only for the depth of penetration but also the density of the particle layer.) I would suggest that answers refer to the points I made and if someone can think about something which was not on my radar it would continue as number 7) Hopefully this thread won’t end in a silly YouTube as defending argument to something which is not related to this topic) Let’s have a debate/discussion which is on-topic and not off-topic.Knowing how heated argument exchanges can become, disagreement is welcome, but with respect to other participants please. (Stay calm, ladies and gentlemen) -
I'm looking for a new professional violin, and whenever I try a new one I like to tap the tailpiece just to see what it sounds like. Every tailpiece seems to have a different pitch and different decay time, and sometimes a tailpiece will put out a dissonant collection of several pitches at once. I've noticed that on the nicer-sounding instruments I've tried, the tap tone of the tailpiece seems to match that of the body of the instrument (if it's a pure tone). However, from what I understand, too much resonance behind the bridge can cause wolfiness. I'm not a luthier, just a performer, so I'd like to know if anyone thinks there's actually a connection here, in their experience. Does the tap tone indicate some quality of the violin, or just the tailpiece itself? Should this be taken into consideration when choosing tailpieces? Or does the tone only reflect some aspect of setup? -
Summary: Power efficiency in the violin Full article: The evolution of air resonance power efficiency in the violin and its ancestors The abstract from the article:
-
I would like to ask what is happening, scientifically, when "playing in" a violin. I have recently been given an old violin which had sat in a drawer for over 20 years, unplayed. Initially it sounded nasal and tight. I have been gradually breaking it in using various techniques, as follows - 1. Extensive use of scales in double stops, emphasising 4ths, 5ths, 8-ves. 2. Use of thirds, sixths, tenths, to generate "Tartini tones", also using minor 2nd and major 7ths to induce vibrational "pulsing" 3. Single note chromatic scales, using slow bows, playing as close to the bridge as possible, with as much bow pressure as possible. 4. Normal playing of regular repertoire, hours daily. Since beginning this process a few days ago, I have noticed a distinct "opening up" of the sound. Several notes already "ring" better. This is anecdotal, however; I'm curious to know what is happening on a cellular level, and why. --Are there micro-stresses or fractures happening in the wood? Creep? Settling in under newly strung setup? --Are the vibrations generating heat within the wood cells resulting in change? --Is breath generating a sort of mini humidity cycling? Thanks for any insights.
