Low Density Spruce

[scordatura]

After a long hiatus from violin making, i've got the bug back...

Anyway, I am interested in opinions about so called "low density spruce". Is this garden variety engelmann? I realize that there is quite a bit of variation within a given species but I have noticed the term "low density spruce". Does this differ that much from others selling engelmann spruce or is it a different species?

Thoughts, opinions?

I have a stash of spruce that was purchased from a famous maker. When I asked him why he was selling this wood he said "we found something lighter".

[Michael_Molnar]

Well, low density (lightness) is a good property, but so is stiffness (sound velocity). Then, there are the visual aesthetics such as grain and color.

If the wood is indeed from a successful maker, you too should do well. Sometimes makers try to trade up, but only achieve minimal improvement.

Stay Tuned.

Mike

[Craig Tucker]

Thoughts, opinions?

I have a stash of spruce that was purchased from a famous maker. When I asked him why he was selling this wood he said "we found something lighter".

Great question.

I ended up giving away all of the Engelmann I bought and stocked, through the years, because I thought it was too light. I have related this here before, I promise you, I am not saying this simply to be contrary.

Many years back, I went to Silver City NM and bought some really nice top quality Engelmann Spruce billets directly from Don Musser back when he was selling guitar/violin/mando wood. It was wonderful, very white, very light, unbelievably strong, well split - and all the rest, but by that time, I had become so enamored with using Sitka spruce, (From Bruce Harvie at Orcas Island, very dense, very heavy, very strong wood also, but definately not considered "light" by any stretch) that I found that Engelmann didn't lend itself very well to my established making style, and I didn't want to re-learn a new wood.

Really, I just didn't like it for bellies... I really didn't give it much of a chance, to be frank.

After much thought and many conversations with other makers, my conclusion is that it doesn't really matter, there is no "best", or perhaps even no "better" wood, as such.

Outside of making sure that the mechanical qualities you seek are inherent in the wood you have, (and anyway, how do you know in advance about tone? until you actually use it for a while you really don't - all you have is various makers opinions on the matter - I say, try their work and judge by that) then, exactly how you employ the wood you have seems to me to be the most significant part of the process.

Of course, this is only my opinion and many makers swear that only whatever wood they happen to use is appropriate, but the longer you look at the situation, the more evident it becomes that there are many makers out there making very good violins out of many different types of wood.

One good old Cajun boy I know, swears by cypress raised from the Louisiana swamps. Colloquially, it is known as "Sinker Cypress". First rate work too.

[Don Noon]

As a general rule, I think lower density spruce allows making a ligher weight top, giving quicker response and more overall volume. That doesn't mean it sounds "better", though, if you're after the aesthetic quality of the tone. As a personal preference, I like fast and loud, so maybe CT might be interested in a really dense (~.5 g/cc) sitka set I have had for about 20 years or so.

I have Engelmann that varies in density from .32 to .4, and Sitka that varies from .33 to .5. Same wood, just grows differently.

[NewNewbie]

I ended up giving away all of the Engelmann I bought and stocked, through the years, because I thought it was too light.

... I found that Engelmann didn't lend itself very well to my established making style, and I didn't want to re-learn a new wood.

Really, I just didn't like it for bellies... I really didn't give it much of a chance, to be frank.

After much thought and many conversations with other makers, my conclusion is that it doesn't really matter, there is no "best", or perhaps even no "better" wood, as such.

We have Stradivari using wood that is all over the place density wise, so to say that density is the key factor, would not be supported by Antonio's work.

CT makes a great point, and if a maker has only used a certain type of wood always, or has only made a couple of violins then it is hard to adapt to something 'new', as 'new' means change in one case, and in the other case everything is 'new'.

If selecting the best wood was a key factor, then just by the law of randomness, you would see some maker pop-up onto the grid as a top maker, and then disappear as the wood supply ran down. What we see is instead is that good makers tend to stay good, and bad makers have only one way to go. Another argument against wood being the 'magic bullet' is that we don't see young beginner makers cracking the top spots in making, even if they have a top maker's wood, and his/her guidance in making. It takes years to get to Carnegie Hall and so it is also with making.

If you had a teacher that taught you to use a certain wood, then you would be best to start out using that wood, since you are inheriting someone else's built in preference, but if not, then make the most of a good situation, and use this wood, until you make enough instruments to know what you are looking for.

IOW - Take the wood you have and make it work for you.

[Janito]

If selecting the best wood was a key factor, then just by the law of randomness, you would see some maker pop-up onto the grid as a top maker, and then disappear as the wood supply ran down. What we see is instead is that good makers tend to stay good, and bad makers have only one way to go.

I am afraid this statement is easily refuted because (i) there are one-off violins that sound better than 'big-name' ones, and (ii) you cannot possibly know all good or bad makers and their temporal performance.

I always find it amusing to read the responses on "I want to buy a great modern violin, so who should I go to"-type thread.

[MANFIO]

I think sound is up to the maker. The wood used may have an influence but sound will depend much more on the model, archings, thicknesses, set up etc. and how all this

things work together.

I personally like low density spruce because I can make a light top, thin, but with a higher tap tone.

[Michael Darnton]

My experience with low-density spruce wasn't good. The instruments were fast and clear, but the sound lacked complexity. I liked the way it worked, but players generally didn't. In my experience. . .

[JimMurphy]

Using low-density spruce to make a lightweight belly is certainly an option. When that lightweight belly is 'matched' with a very stiff bassbar though, maybe the spruce being low-density doesn't really amount to a hiil-of-beans for great tone color. Or does it ? And then there was Del Gesu's multi-million dollar fiddles with hefty bassbars and thick belly, ribs, back. It's all good!!

Jim

[Don Noon]

My experience with low-density spruce wasn't good. The instruments were fast and clear, but the sound lacked complexity.

My measurements show a slight trend toward higher damping in low-density spruce, which I believe would weaken the overtones and give a plainer sound.

[scordatura]

Thanks for the responses. So low density = engelmann. It does make sense that a less dense wood would not have as much inherent dampening so the complexity of the sound might suffer.

I find it interesting when people say that del Gesu's are thick. I am not sure that this is true. I was just looking at the Biddulph del Gesu books that have measurements taken from the exhibition in the 90s at the Metropolitain Museum and some of the Strad posters/plans that I have. From what I could see the tops were all in the 2.3-3+ range. Not like the really thick French violins that need to be regraduated. Before anyone gets worked up...I am aware that most of the Strads, Guarneri and other antique instruments are not in their original state (due to Vuillaume and other shops over the years). And yes tenths and even hundredths of a mm make a difference.

Also how many wood samples from Stradivari and other great Cremonese makers have really been scientifically put to the test to quantify the properties of the wood. I am aware of Condax and a few others that had access to samples for mainly varnish and ground analysis. If there are any studies of such things anyone could point to I would appreciate it.

To me the question is would you rather have a less dense wood and work around the problems of complexity of sound or modulate a dense wood that tends to not vibrate with the freedom that wood with a lower density does. As with many things the answer lies somewhere in the middle. Perhaps that is where things beyond the wood like ground and varnish figure in to the above...which is indeed another rich topic!

[scordatura]

My measurements show a slight trend toward higher damping in low-density spruce, which I believe would weaken the overtones and give a plainer sound.

Did you compare European or Sitka to the Englemann? It would be interesting to see the differences.

[MANFIO]

No, there is low density european spruce too.

[NewNewbie]

I am afraid this statement is easily refuted because (i) there are one-off violins that sound better than 'big-name' ones, and (ii) you cannot possibly know all good or bad makers and their temporal performance.

I always find it amusing to read the responses on "I want to buy a great modern violin, so who should I go to"-type thread.

Forests full of trees do not produce just one exceptional piece of wood.

Yes there is some variation, from piece to piece in the same tree, but not enough to make a huge difference.

So if a 'one-off' is exceptional, then perhaps it is not some-one-thing but a combination of things that is responsible.

How many makers has there been that reached the top of making, only to stay briefly, and then disappear due to a failure to continue to produce top quality work? By the top I mean top dollar for work.

The consistency of the making is due to a lot of hard work, sweat/thought equity. Something Science can't measure, unlike density of wood, which is relatively easy to measure.

Salve Håkedal, violin maker, Wood density calculator for rough peices

"In comparison, a 1736 Stradivari

violin top shows a spring–fall ratio

of 1:1.153 and an overall density

of -574 HU or 0.427g/cm3, which is

relatively heavy." - Path Through The Woods Sept 2005 The Strad

The real question for me is, how can a maker maximize what any given piece of wood has to offer.

Reaching the full potential is not some easy math problem, or as simple as having the lowest density wood on the block.

Nor is it as simple as following directions from a poster, otherwise we would all be Top makers.

If it was so, then you would never see makers disclosing their wood sources. Something that happens quite regular here at Maestronet.

Top makers are Hard workers and Top thinkers! .....i think??????? :blink: :unsure: :huh:

i hope I worked that one out right?

[scordatura]

Forests full of trees do not produce just one exceptional piece of wood.

Yes there is some variation, from piece to piece in the same tree, but not enough to make a huge difference.

So if a 'one-off' is exceptional, then perhaps it is not some-one-thing but a combination of things that is responsible.

How many makers has there been that reached the top of making, only to stay briefly, and then disappear due to a failure to continue to produce top quality work? By the top I mean top dollar for work.

The consistency of the making is due to a lot of hard work, sweat/thought equity. Something Science can't measure, unlike density of wood, which is relatively easy to measure.

Salve Håkedal, violin maker, Wood density calculator for rough peices

"In comparison, a 1736 Stradivari

violin top shows a spring–fall ratio

of 1:1.153 and an overall density

of -574 HU or 0.427g/cm3, which is

relatively heavy." - Path Through The Woods Sept 2005 The Strad

The real question for me is, how can a maker maximize what any given piece of wood has to offer.

Reaching the full potential is not some easy math problem, or as simple as having the lowest density wood on the block.

Nor is it as simple as following directions from a poster, otherwise we would all be Top makers.

If it was so, then you would never see makers disclosing their wood sources. Something that happens quite regular here at Maestronet.

Top makers are Hard workers and Top thinkers! .....i think??????? :blink: :unsure: :huh:

i hope I worked that one out right?

I don't think I or anyone was implying that this is as simple as a species or give type of wood. Although if you do not start with good (whatever that means...) materials, you are finished before you begin. My aim is to have a discussion of what type of top wood people are using and where you purchase that wood.

Back when I was into making, anyone who discussed (openly anyway) using anything other than European wood was a heretic. It seems that that line of thinking has gone out of favor to some extent--which I think is a good thing.

This reminds me of Formula 1 racing. You could not just put a McLaren undertray/diffuser on a Ferrari chassis with a Red Bull front wing and hope it would work to make the fastest car. That being said when McLaren developed a trick thing called an "f duct" last season all of the teams scrambled to copy it AND integrate it into their vehicles. Sorry for the F1 reference...

[scordatura]

Wait a minute. Could it be that this "NewNewbie" was the guy who sold me the wood

[Michael Darnton]

I find it interesting when people say that del Gesu's are thick. I am not sure that this is true. I was just looking at the Biddulph del Gesu books that have measurements taken from the exhibition in the 90s at the Metropolitain Museum and some of the Strad posters/plans that I have.

There are strong indications that the thick ones are original grads and the thinner ones are regraduated. I used to think that maybe the earlier ones were thin, and the later ones thick until I'd seen one from 1736 that had missed the whole regraduation frenzy (as did the Cannone) by being "under a bed" for 200+ years. It was just as thick as the late ones: a top approaching 3.4 in places and a back running generally from 3.0 or so to 6.0+mm. So now I tend to believe the story that most of them have been regraduated. Remember that even early on Paganini knew that they had been thinned, and was always looking for ones that had their original grads, but couldn't find many.

[scordatura]

There are strong indications that the thick ones are original grads and the thinner ones are regraduated. I used to think that maybe the earlier ones were thin, and the later ones thick until I'd seen one from 1736 that had missed the whole regraduation frenzy (as did the Cannone) by being "under a bed" for 200+ years. It was just as thick as the late ones: a top approaching 3.4 in places and a back running generally from 3.0 or so to 6.0+mm. So now I tend to believe the story that most of them have been regraduated. Remember that even early on Paganini knew that they had been thinned, and was always looking for ones that had their original grads, but couldn't find many.

Ahh the benefits from working in a shop like B&F or your newer venture with Stephan to see legendary fiddles come across the bench...lucky you are. How did the 1736 violin sound? Was it as responsive and sound as rich as thinned examples? Difficult to compare apples to oranges but you know what I mean.

[Michael Darnton]

it sounded great, but only after it warmed up, and it was no fun to play. Perhaps it nneeded to be woken up, or maybe it would be that way forever. I only saw it for a couple of months, so I don't know. I could see why someone in a more gentle time would want to thin it.

[scordatura]

Speaking of the Cannone, a few days ago I watched a youtube vid with Eugene Fodor playing the instrument in CA. Very interesting from a number of standpoints. The fiddle sounded great as far as one can tell from the video. What a tragic figure Eugene ended up being. Got to know him a bit--one talented and crazy dude. He was really fun on a sailing boat.

[CT Dolan]

There are strong indications that the thick ones are original grads and the thinner ones are regraduated. I used to think that maybe the earlier ones were thin, and the later ones thick until I'd seen one from 1736 that had missed the whole regraduation frenzy (as did the Cannone) by being "under a bed" for 200+ years. It was just as thick as the late ones: a top approaching 3.4 in places and a back running generally from 3.0 or so to 6.0+mm. So now I tend to believe the story that most of them have been regraduated. Remember that even early on Paganini knew that they had been thinned, and was always looking for ones that had their original grads, but couldn't find many.

My understanding is, there is a Giuseppe filius Andrea violin (from the year 1714, and thought to be the work of the young del Gesu), which is quite thick as well (maybe not as thick as some of the del Gesu's which have survived re-graduation, but certainly more thick than was Andrea's custom, being something like 5.8 mm in the back, as best I recall).

[CT Dolan]

Speaking of the Cannone, a few days ago I watched a youtube vid with Eugene Fodor playing the instrument in CA. Very interesting from a number of standpoints. The fiddle sounded great as far as one can tell from the video. What a tragic figure Eugene ended up being. Got to know him a bit--one talented and crazy dude. He was really fun on a sailing boat.

Couldn't find the vid, could you please you point me to it? Thanks. -Chris

[Michael Darnton]

This, perhaps?

[NewNewbie]

Wait a minute. Could it be that this "NewNewbie" was the guy who sold me the wood

Hey! I thought we had an agreement!

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

[NewNewbie]

My aim is to have a discussion of what type of top wood people are using and where you purchase that wood.

Back when I was into making, anyone who discussed (openly anyway) using anything other than European wood was a heretic. It seems that that line of thinking has gone out of favor to some extent--which I think is a good thing.

If you do a search here at Maestronet you will find a lot of good things,(whatever that means...), about Simeon Chambers

His store link is Simeon Chambers Tonewood Store.

Yes and we use to burn those heretics at the stake ..........with their own wood!

Just remember that I am not refunding you your money if you decide to buy from Simeon!