Question for Oded

[actonern]

I know you've posted elsewhere that at least some of the masters might have done "final voicing" of their instruments by localized removal of wood from on the outside once they were strung up in the white.

And from the Strad posters its clear that there are localized areas that deviate, sometimes significantly, from an idealized uniformity of thicknessing, which leads one to suppose that they were either less fussy about such things or that there was something afoot along the lines you propose.

I'm wondering if there is any evidence from these instruments that the outside arches show localized dips that might support such a notion?

Best regards,

Ernie

[Oded Kishony]

....is any evidence from these instruments that the outside arches show localized dips that might support such a notion?

As you say these makers ( I'm most familiar with Del Gesu's work) could have been less fussy and Del Gesu would be a good example of that. However, tool marks which can be seen on the surface of the back of Il Cannoneas a series of parallel lines on the center bottom of the lower bouts.Tool marks are evident on the top as well. These tool marks correspond to thinner graduations and in one instance to an area which it noticeably thicker. This clearly suggests intentionality rather than some random event and also suggests that it was done for acoustical reasons. The tool marks on the Cannone also correlate to it's spectrum signature.

Quite a few of the violins in the Biddulph Del Gesu book show tool marks under the varnish. Most (over 90%) of the tool marks correspond to thinner areas.

Oded

[actonern]

I'm sorry if this terrain has already been canvassed elsewhere... I'm not aware that it has.

What about a broader sample of makers...looking at the more careful execution of Strads, for example, any similar telltale signs?

Del Gesu was so haphazard in other respects, like scrolls, badly bent ribs, poorly detailed purfling etc. where no acoustical account can be made of his sloppiness, that the idea of purposeful intent underlying wavy archings is a bit harder to accept.

E

[Oded Kishony]

The best sounding instrument maker in history, where tool marks correspond to graduations and to spectrum signatures-not enough for you?

Yes, I've seen tool marks on other maker's instruments including Amati and Landolfi but I have not correlated graduations with those tool marks.

Oded

[jmannsback]

@ Oded: "However, tool marks which can be seen on the surface of the back of Il Cannoneas a series of parallel lines on the center bottom of the lower bouts.Tool marks are evident on the top as well. These tool marks correspond to thinner graduations and in one instance to an area which it noticeably thicker."

Yep, and it is also apparent that del Gesu` used a toothed plane almost exclusively to finish things up on the interior of the back in a fiddle dated 1742. I too have seen a couple with parallel lines on the exterior of the ribs. Really cool to look at through a magnifying glass, in reflected light. However, I don't see why anyone has a particular reason to correlate tool marks with thicknessess. A properly sharpened toothed plane with a steep but shallow cut is probably pretty easy to use, especially for a 'slovenly genius' like Guarneri del Gesu.

But which del Gesu` are we talking about here?

jmann

[Oded Kishony]

Have you bothered reading the post? Try reading it again. Look for words that are underlined and have a link attached, those are important clues.

[jmannsback]

That's a poor excuse for a picture of a 40 million dollar fiddle, huh?

At least it's a real Del Gesu. He ALWAYS painted black varnish on the rib mitres and bevels of the head. If a del Gesu' doesn't have at least some trace of that black varnish where it's supposed to be, it is not a del Gesu. Period.

[Selim]

...... those are important clues.

May be..

The ultimate proof would be creating similar sound(at least) by following all these clues.

...??

I am afraid, it is just the elephant's tail,

[Oded Kishony]

You are right Selim. Did you know there was an elephant in the room? That there is evidence that Del Gesu may have had a method of voicing his instruments?

So, if I have identified the tail, what do you have to contribute, what evidence would you like to share regarding Cremonese working methods?

Oded

Selim, go back and read all the posts carefully. 'jmannsback' missed that I was specifically talking about Del Gesu's Cannon and you misssed that I was answering 'jmannsback'.

sigh........

[Selim]

You are right Selim. Did you know there was an elephant in the room? That there is evidence that Del Gesu may have had a method of voicing his instruments?

So, if I have identified the tail, what do you have to contribute, what evidence would you like to share regarding Cremonese working methods?

Oded

Not only DG, many of them had the method.

The context is beyond "working outside", and it is just the tail.

What I know Cremonese working methods?

Not sure, may be nothing.

But I know one thing,, I am expecting big, and I am working for the big.

When all turn to evidence, there will be good times to share.

[Selim]

..

Selim, go back and read all the posts carefully. 'jmannsback' missed that I was specifically talking about Del Gesu's Cannon and you misssed that I was answering 'jmannsback'.

sigh........

Ok, sorry, I have no intention to steal the storm.

Here is my point,

Without complete awareness of design dynamics, scraping wood on white violin is gambling. There is no recipe for this, I am sure DG had expertise and undertstanding of his design, to decide where on the violin needed to be thick or thin. I am sure he spent pretty good time for diagnosis.

For every thin spot there is a thick spot that counter it. And there is no generic map, or formula for this.

Are you ok with this?

[Torbjörn Zethelius]

You are right Selim. Did you know there was an elephant in the room? That there is evidence that Del Gesu may have had a method of voicing his instruments?

So, if I have identified the tail, what do you have to contribute, what evidence would you like to share regarding Cremonese working methods?

Oded

Selim, go back and read all the posts carefully. 'jmannsback' missed that I was specifically talking about Del Gesu's Cannon and you misssed that I was answering 'jmannsback'.

sigh........

Oded,

Selim has a valid point. If you claim to have the 'evidence', then the way to prove it is by making a violin comparable to Del Gesu's own. If not, then your 'evidence' are simply just tool marks from hasty workmanship.

Torbjörn

[robertdo]

Oded,

Selim has a valid point. If you claim to have the 'evidence', then the way to prove it is by making a violin comparable to Del Gesu's own. If not, then your 'evidence' are simply just tool marks from hasty workmanship.

Torbjörn

If I am not mistaken, Vuillaume made a copy of the Cannone that sounds basically as good. Is there some graduation maps of this copy, that could be compared with the original? Or maybe this has already been done long time ago by many makers?

Oded, when you say there some similar marks on other instruments from other makers but you haven't correlated them with thickness, do you mean they don't correlate or you didn't look for it?

Why would scraping wood from the outside not be a common method developed by the first makers and then used by the one who came later? It seem logical to do for professional makers since in a way or another they most likely developed a sixth sense for that, same as any professional do in his/her area of expertise.

[Oded Kishony]

Selim has a valid point. If you claim to have the 'evidence', then the way to prove it is by making a violin comparable to Del Gesu's own. If not, then your 'evidence' are simply just tool marks from hasty workmanship.

This idea is often presented as a challenge. Economists often get it in the form of: 'if your so smart why aren't you rich' a funny response I heard from a Nobel economist was; 'if you're so rich why are you so dumb'

First of all I'm not claiming to, nor am I interested in, replicating Del Gesu's work. To begin with his instruments are over 200 years old. Secondly, every maker has his/her own voice which depends on sometimes minute differences in tool handling, I call it 'talent' etc. Then of course duplicating the exact properties of the wood is quite difficult if not impossible and lastly one would have to duplicate the effect of any repair or restoration work.

What I am saying is that I think I have found, by closely examining Del Gesu's instruments in the Biddulph book, evidence that he acoustically altered his instruments from the outside. The 'proof' is that when you identify the tool marks under the varnish they very often are located in the same areas where the plate is thinner (and in one instance on the Cannone thicker) If the tool marks were random then the graduations under them would also be randomly distributed. Some thicker, some thinner, some the same. The fact that the areas a mostly thinner demonstrates that this was done intentionally and I assume for acoustical reasons.

In the instance of the Cannone I've mapped the tool marks and found that they correspond to nodal lines of a particular mode (as defined by Oliver Rodger's FEA model)and that the biggest resonance on the Cannone (taken from a recording)is that same mode.

That's an awful lot of coincidences to be a coincidence ;-)

when you say there some similar marks on other instruments from other makers but you haven't correlated them with thickness, do you mean they don't correlate or you didn't look for it?

I haven't had the graduation map to match with the tool marks so I don't know if they match.

I believe that this was a common practice of the Cremonese school

Most of the Guarneri family instruments show a lot of tool marks under the varnish. I have not seen such tool marks on Strads. But that does not mean that he didn't employ this same method, only that he was more careful about the appearance of his instruments. There may be a way to verify if Strad did this or not but I haven't had the time and resources to pursue it.

Oded

[James M. Jones]

my understanding is that the ol boys would /rough shape the top and back/ select arch height first/ compleate concave surface/and ffs/ glue courpus with neck nailed on/ compleate edge/ install purfling/ make the channel/ Then blend all/ this would seem to provide a perfect opprotunity for tonal dinkering.or adjustments they probably never knew the finnish grads near the edge nor cared but were hearing for a particular quality ? ( seems to me "adjustment" is a little more like they knew outcomes before adjusting? dinkering has more an implication of lets see what this does)at least they could tap and feel for responce with out stringing up in the white

[Johnmasters]

I have seen a lot of marks that look like facets on the backs of photos of old violins, especially if the wood is plain.

Whoever says that Oded should come up with evidence to "prove" something...... I have heard this from many of you. The idea of a forum should be to discuss ideas... Armchair reviewers don't help much.

If del Gesu had more marks than others, perhaps it was because he was less carefull than some to finish-scrape his external wood removal. Call it casual work, indifference, or even laziness.

[James M. Jones]

I call it greater tolarance in surface finish . DGU's goal seems to be tone first.

[Torbjörn Zethelius]

The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

[jmannsback]

Oded, rest assured that 'jmannsback' didn't "miss" anything.

What exactly is the extent of your experience with del Gesu's output?

jmann

[NewNewbie]

The 'proof' is that when you identify the tool marks under the varnish they very often are located in the same areas where the plate is thinner (and in one instance on the Cannone thicker)

So am I correct in thinking that the thick area was even thicker to start with?

In the instance of the Cannone I've mapped the tool marks and found that they correspond to nodal lines of a particular mode (as defined by Oliver Rodger's FEA model)and that the biggest resonance on the Cannone (taken from a recording)is that same mode.

Does removing wood at a nodal line reduce the frequency of that particular mode?

That's an awful lot of coincidences to be a coincidence ;-)

I wonder if there are any coincidences with Torbjörn's Inside approach?

I made a copy of a Landolfi owned by a very accomplished violinist. The story was covered by the local press here When the violin was finished in the white I met with the player who loved the sound of the instrument but wished for some greater complexity in the sound. We met later in my studio and after an analysis I decided on some small changes-just scraping the back in a particular spot as indicated by tapping the surface and listening to the vibrating strings ( I call this string reciprocity or bi directionality ) Even though I removed very little wood the change in sound was dramatic and the consensus was that it was an improvement.

So while I agree with the above statement and in fact the violin was judged as excellent before I made any chages, the possibility of improving a very good sounding fiddle exists as is clearly illustrated with this instrument. Using a method that unveils the hidden potentials of a violin creates possibilities that don't exist by working to a formula-even a very good one.

Oded

PS the musician in the story tried to dissuade me from making any changes-he didn't think the violin could be improved.

Was the improvement more complexity in the sound?

Have you ever had the case of a violin being 'lessened' by all this outside scraping?

I wonder how much 'hacking away' it takes to botch a job up?

I seem to be in a very questioning mode here, so I apologize if it seems a wee bit tedious.

Thanks.

[Oded Kishony]

jmann wrote:

rest assured that 'jmannsback' didn't "miss" anything

But which del Gesu` are we talking about here?

It's very clear that I was talking specifically about Del Gesu's Cannone. I atached a link with a photo of it. So rest assured you missed it.

moving on.....

What exactly is the extent of your experience with del Gesu's output?

I've played about half a dozen Del Gesu violins as well as his cello, including the Kreisler DG. I also attended the Del Gesu exhibit in the 1980's and got to hear many of the instruments played side by side in an unforgettable concert.

But that is completely irrelevant.

I'm simply reporting what I see in photos and published graduation maps. If I were a music critic, would I have to play or sing as well as any of the performers? How good my own instruments sound has nothing to do with my ability to observe and think. In fact, some of the most prominent acoustics experts at Oberlin have never made a violin and don't even play the instrument,(In those instances there isn't even any pudding to taste. ) this doesn't diminish their technical understanding of how the violin works.

Oded

[Jacob]

What exactly is the extent of your experience with del Gesu's output?

jmann

Do you feel Oded might be in need of a pilgrimage to Brewster, Alabama?

[jmannsback]

Oded,

Have you ever read the book published in Italy, 2002, entitled "Il Settecento a Cremona (1700 - 1760)"?

jmann

[Oded Kishony]

NewNewbie' wrote:

So am I correct in thinking that the thick area was even thicker to start with?

I don't know but the fact that the tool marks line up with graduation features means that they are not random but show they were done with a purpose.

Does removing wood at a nodal line reduce the frequency of that particular mode?

Shouldn't lower the frequency by much but may increase the amplitude/volume.

I wonder if there are any coincidences with Torbjörn's Inside approach?

You'll have to ask Torbjorn, besides, Torbjorn doesn't have to worry about it, since all his fiddles sound like Strads already.

Was the improvement more complexity in the sound?

Yes, dramatically!

Have you ever had the case of a violin being 'lessened' by all this outside scraping?

Yes, I've gotten into trouble using it. Sometimes there is an improvement which on further thinning then reverses

I wonder how much 'hacking away' it takes to botch a job up?

I do my best to refrain from any 'hacking away' .There are areas that seem completely resistant to change-where is seems that you could remove it down to paper and it wouldn't make any difference in the sound. There are other places where just three or four licks with a scraper transform the instrument. I have not figured out how to identify one from the other without actually trying it.

I seem to be in a very questioning mode here, so I apologize if it seems a wee bit tedious.

I really like questions, they make me think.

Oded

[gabi]

"Yes, I've gotten into trouble using it. Sometimes there is an improvement which then reverses "

Oded,do you have a statistic for that? how many times reverses vs not

also whats the timeline for the reverse,? im assuming the reverse is hapening because of playing