Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Francois Denis article in The Strad


violins88

Recommended Posts

In the Feb. 2010 issue of The Strad, page 47, in the article by Francois Denis, it appears to me that a mistake has been made. I am sorry to not post the figure. If you have this magazine, please look at the figure 2. The omega symbol is used twice on each line segment. The segments cannot possibly be equal. I suggest "omega" and "omega prime" were the intended symbols.

This makes a huge difference in the analysis.

If I have missed something, please tell me.

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John,

the line segments you describe are indeed of different length.

The common properties of the points labled omega are that they each lie at the midpoint of their respective line segments and that they mark locations that are half the reference height.

I found the article significant in that it presents an easy and direct shop practice that sets up the long arch without a template and also sets up an overall distribution of height that is aproximately cycloidal. All in all, is very plausible to me and in line with the way I like to do things-- for example quicly shaping a curve by eye to pass through several reference points. The reference points in the article are placed at what I call "powerful" positions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... .

The common properties of the points labeled omega are that they each lie at the midpoint of their respective line segments and that they mark locations that are half the reference height.

... .

I too spotted this, but never got around to asking the question. I believe you are correct. Thanks.

Now I have to get my copy of The Strad back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John,

the line segments you describe are indeed of different length.

The common properties of the points labled omega are that they each lie at the midpoint of their respective line segments and that they mark locations that are half the reference height.

I found the article significant in that it presents an easy and direct shop practice that sets up the long arch without a template and also sets up an overall distribution of height that is aproximately cycloidal. All in all, is very plausible to me and in line with the way I like to do things-- for example quicly shaping a curve by eye to pass through several reference points. The reference points in the article are placed at what I call "powerful" positions.

Doug,

Ok, I guess I see the point now. Just not the way I am used to seeing labels. I thought omega referred to the length of the segment. They are both midpoints. I would have labeled them differently. Thanks for clarifying.

If I get time, I will try to translate it into my language. Sometimes my brain works differently than it should. And sometimes it just doesn't work at all. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the Feb. 2010 issue of The Strad, page 47, in the article by Francois Denis, it appears to me that a mistake has been made. I am sorry to not post the figure. If you have this magazine, please look at the figure 2. The omega symbol is used twice on each line segment. The segments cannot possibly be equal. I suggest "omega" and "omega prime" were the intended symbols.

This makes a huge difference in the analysis.

If I have missed something, please tell me.

John

Actually the diagram 2 is right but the caption is a little bit ambiguous. The correct redaction would be at the middle of each segment of the diagonal ("Be" "Bb","Bf" and "Ba").

Note also that the height of "B" the crossing point of the diagonal is the reference for the measurements of the other points but I don't say that is the highest point of the arching

francois denis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually the diagram 2 is right but the caption is a little bit ambiguous. The correct redaction would be at the middle of each segment of the diagonal ("Be" "Bb","Bf" and "Ba").

Note also that the height of "B" the crossing point of the diagonal is the reference for the measurements of the other points but I don't say that is the highest point of the arching

francois denis

Francois,

Thank you.

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was wondering how the fractional arching heights were measured. It is easy to do this today with dial calipers and calculators. Francois hints that maybe metal calipers were for arching heights. Stradivari's wooden caliper with equal arms was used for thickness

post-24376-1268967922.jpg

To measure 1/2 heights one would need calipers with arms in the ratio of 1:2. The central measurement (beta) is taken with the long arms and then compared with "little omega" using the short arms.

This idea would require a different caliper for each fraction. Is there another way to measure fractional thickness??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's interesting David!

Euro Pelluzzi, in a book called Tecnica Costruttiva Degli Antichi Liutai Italiani (sold out) mentions proportional dividers, and I think proportional dividers are also mentioned in the 1795 Cremonese manuscript "LIBRUM SEGRETI DE BUTTEGHA - Regule et Formule Phoniche per Liutaro et Violinaro" (that I would translate as "Workshop's Secret Book - Phonic Rules and Formulas for instrument and violin makers"). This manuscript was once in the library of the Schollar Patetta Federico and now in the Vatican Library.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's interesting David!

Euro Pelluzzi, in a book called Tecnica Costruttiva Degli Antichi Liutai Italiani (sold out) mentions proportional dividers, and I think proportional dividers are also mentioned in the 1795 Cremonese manuscript "LIBRUM SEGRETI DE BUTTEGHA - Regule et Formule Phoniche per Liutaro et Violinaro" (that I would translate as "Workshop's Secret Book - Phonic Rules and Formulas for instrument and violin makers"). This manuscript was once in the library of the Schollar Patetta Federico and now in the Vatican Library.

Euro Pelluzzi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was wondering how the fractional arching heights were measured. It is easy to do this today with dial calipers and calculators. Francois hints that maybe metal calipers were for arching heights. Stradivari's wooden caliper with equal arms was used for thickness

post-24376-1268967922.jpg

To measure 1/2 heights one would need calipers with arms in the ratio of 1:2. The central measurement (beta) is taken with the long arms and then compared with "little omega" using the short arms.

This idea would require a different caliper for each fraction. Is there another way to measure fractional thickness??

Hi Mr catnip

You can find fractions with the triangles. The well-known 3-4-5 triangle provide fractions are 3-4 ; 4-5 and 3-5 . As they used few of them you cab find any measurement with a simple geometrical drawing . Personnaly I use a "pige" (a kind of triangle template ) with a compas.

francois

post-29143-1269108442.jpg

post-29143-1269108428.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little bit more...

About compass. There is this interesting similitude between the set of compass used by Stradivari and the set illustrated by the Diderot d'Alembert encyclopedia . Note that only the wooden caliper is said to be a thickness compass both the metal compas are called "arching compass"....

About the pointing technic, I add two illustrations of this type of compas from the Middle Age (Villard de Honnecourt booklet XIII° century and a sculptor at work XVIII° century).

François

PS: I have to say that I found the type of proportionnel compass showed by David is easy to use but.... it takes time to adjust. Too much time I think for the ancient instrument makers.

post-29143-1269109565.jpg

post-29143-1269109606.jpg

post-29143-1269109646.jpg

post-29143-1269109536.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little bit more...

About compass. There is this interesting similitude between the set of compass used by Stradivari and the set illustrated by the Diderot d'Alembert encyclopedia . Note that only the wooden caliper is said to be a thickness compass both the metal compas are called "arching compass"....

About the pointing technic, I add two illustrations of this type of compas from the Middle Age (Villard de Honnecourt booklet XIII° century and a sculptor at work XVIII° century).

François

PS: I have to say that I found the type of proportionnel compass showed by David is easy to use but.... it takes time to adjust. Too much time I think for the ancient instrument makers.

Hi François:

Thoroughly enjoyed the Strad article. Anything you would care to add about how the old masters reached their final arching shape would be of great interest here. Of course, we have beaten catenaries, curtate cycloids, circles, etc. to death but tell us more of what you think if you will. If is a research topic for your next book, we'll understand if you don't want to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...