Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'plate tuning'.
Found 5 results
-
Greetings, In a recent talk with a Luthier friend, he shared with me that plate tuning could get very tedious, because of the difficulties at each step to know exactly where to carve so as to obtain the desired impact on the final frequency. Reading some papers, I came across a very interesting one, by Alan Carruth, a former student of Carleen Hutchins (attached carruth1991plate.pdf). In this article, the author gives a diagram with the impacts that carving might have on several different regions on the plate. I then compiled this information in a spreadsheet, where you can input the desired final frequencies for the plates, and then feed it with the current ones. Based on this information, the spreadsheet will show diagrams with the regions that could be carved in order to achieve the final desired frequencies. My friend liked it so much, that he encouraged me to share it to the Luthier community, so I'm sharing here with you. Please feel free to post any questions, criticism, and any feedback is appreciated. Thanks for your attention! carruth1991plate.pdf
-
Hello to everyone, I have questions about the violin plate tuning. Firstly ; what is the modes ? And what is the A0, A1, B0, B1, B-1 ? What is the tab-tone and why to use and how to find ? What is the #2 - #5 modes ? and how to find these ? What is chladni patterns ? How to use on violin tuning ? What is the tuning frequencies ? Tuning methods ? How can I tuning the plates ? Finally; How can I tuning the bridge? I finding application examples. This is my end of year assignment. Please help me..
-
I had a thought today about the M2 and M5 relationship that has led me off on a tangent. I sketched an approximation of the M2 and M5 nodal lines on the top of the violin that I'm graduating. M2 passed right through the center of the post location that I had laid out. I tried to tap and listen for the flex point to verify it, and it seems about right. It made me wonder whether any study has shown whether there is a benefit to having the soundpost location end up directly on the M2 nodal line. It makes intuitive sense, but my intuition doesn't always apply well to violin physics. I'm thinking that top M5 pushes down on post and into back M2 and vice versa, which may complement B1 and B-1 if there's synchrony with that node? Has anyone seen a study that relates to this question? I'm tempted to mark the node on the plates before assembly by setting up a tone generator, then check it again when assembled (perhaps with dust or seeds inside?) to see if it's still in the same place and whether it's under the post. I have no idea how much the location of this node varies, but I would assume it is a function of arch and graduation. If you follow a successful pattern it probably ends up in more or less the same spot, but you could probably move it somewhat while graduating. Even if I checked this, and determined that it did end up under the post I have no idea how I would assess whether there's any benefit to it. Thoughts anyone?
-
I am just finishing the plates on the second of a pair of 5 string fiddles I was comissioned to make. The wood choice was the same for both instruments, fronts came from the same log and backs as well. I have never been trully convinced by platetuning but there is no harm in measuring things, maybe they'll come in handy someday. Both backs were made using the same archings, I was very careful about it. It resulted in a near perfect match of frecuencies and thicknesses. Both backs are the same. Now, the fronts I made one with a very low arch, just over 14mm. I was aiming for a 305hz mode 5 before bassbar, which I got to with an overall thickness of 2.9mm-3.0. Slightlly thicker between Ffs. The second one I am tuning right now, the arch is higher, 16 mm. Wood from the same tree. I am at 324hz mode 5 before bar and overall thickness of 2.4mm. Sacconi numbers they all are. Am I correct if I draw some conclusions from this ? Higher arch, gives me a stronger front resulting in raised tap tones and decreased thickenesses?
-
Violin Top plate Before ff and bass bar: weight gm.s mode 2 Hz mode 5 Hz 69.5 170 337 After ff and partially (?) carved BBar: 71.2 182 339 Have observed that trimming distal thirds of Bbar RAISES Modes 2 and 5 (probably d/t reduced mass), and that carving/trimming middle third LOWERS modes 2 and 5 (probably d/t reduced central stiffness). But where/how to carve Bbar to bring Mode 2 down more, without affecting Mode 5 much ? And similarly, how best to preferentially affect mode 5 rather than mode 2 ?
