Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Does age matter?


joerobson

Recommended Posts

Jim, I am asking for an external reference for your phrase "frequency separation". Referring to your own thoughts or definitions will not do here.

Anders,

Although I'm sure you'll find the term "frequency separation' used in many acoustic handbooks and psychoacoustics books, I'm quite less sure "a book" exists explaining how this term relates to acoustic stringed instrument design.

Don't blame me. Blame Andrea Amati et al. :lol:

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anders,

Although I'm sure you'll find the term "frequency separation' used in many acoustic handbooks and psychoacoustics books, I'm quite less sure "a book" exists explaining how this term relates to acoustic stringed instrument design.

If that is the case, why don't you come up with some of these references?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about it, Jim? Do you have more to offer than strong hints that you are caught up in blind obsessiveness with one idea?

I've been pretty open minded, repeatedly asking for proof of your ideas, and that could be as simple as producing a half-decent sounding instrument.

If it continues that nothing is offered, I'll probably make an appeal to the moderator to send you into Banned Land. Useless and repetitive static takes away from educational value of the site, and enjoyment of the site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency_separation

Geez everyone knows that :rolleyes::lol::lol::lol:

I keid,I keid, Really I think thats one of the great things about the violin and vioacousticological subjection, is that in lends itself to fun and new exciting made up language.Specupostulatable interjectology is par for the course, or should I say cour'u'se' :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about it, Jim? Do you have more to offer than strong hints ...?

David,

Other than your own welcomed 'hints':

Are you ready to provide - on Maestronet - your detailed varnishing procedures?

Or your tuning procedures?

Or provide 'proof' why a contemporary master viola 'might' sound better than a Strad viola.

Everyone here 'contributes' a little some-some in their own way. Some people are learning. Some get ticked-off occasionally.

Apparently, I'm not the only one holding back some things. Just sayin' ... :)

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim, I'm pretty direct about what information I will and will not provide. If I have something I don't want to reveal, I don't hint at it over and over, and then when clarification is requested, just continue with more "lost in the ozone" responses.

After reading your posts for some years now, my honest belief at this point is that you have nothing meaningful to reveal, and that you are truly lost in the ozone. If there was anything meaningful, you could demonstrate it in some fashion, like by making a half-decent sounding instrument, and this would not require revealing the process. I may not want to reveal some processes of mine, but I am willing to demonstrate results, and do so to musicians and colleagues on a regular basis.

You don't appear to be here to learn. You don't appear to be here to offer useful advice. Why are you here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I may not want to reveal some processes, but I am willing to demonstrate results...

David,

Sure, I've made a 'choice' to publicly discuss only some details of my acoustics work so far. It's my choice. In perspective, the field of stringed acoustic instrument study is still pretty barren - with few theories

and mostly 'subjective' test procedures scattered about.

As far as demonstrating 'objective' test methods/results is concerned, maybe I'm just very diligent at preparing myself for the level of scrutiny anticipated. Again, my choice.

Have I myself scattered 'hints' here & there? Yes, 'guilty' as charged. Life goes on ... :)

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So when you throw the ball you never know where it will land. My cousin and I used to make gunpowder, pack a 6" section of iron pipe with it,

light a cigarette for a fuse, stuff a "Big Pink" rubber ball in the pipe and blast it into who knows where....always wondered about where those things landed.

Actually I was just trying to understand the idea of the boundaries of modern instruments. I often am involved with makers who seem absorbed by the notion that whatever a modern maker produces it can't be as good as the old stuff just because it isn't old. For wood and ground and varnish I have a pretty good idea of where we are. Obviously for sound I am just a good audience. Didn't read the underground too well on this one....but then my social skills are pretty meager.

on we go,

Joe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about it, Jim? Do you have more to offer than strong hints that you are caught up in blind obsessiveness with one idea?

I've been pretty open minded, repeatedly asking for proof of your ideas, and that could be as simple as producing a half-decent sounding instrument.

If it continues that nothing is offered, I'll probably make an appeal to the moderator to send you into Banned Land. Useless and repetitive static takes away from educational value of the site, and enjoyment of the site.

Mr Burgess, this is my 1st post here but I read "The Pegbox" for quite a while. I'm in South Africa by the way - not much violin making going around here.

I think you're a bit hard on the chap, he's not even close to being as obnoxious as Lyndon ( Zulu...), Anders Buen or John Masters at their best. Yourself, as well, are not saying much if anything, besides the odd sheep joke or trying to bite people who actualy SAY something, at every oportunity. What's this nonsense about banning people you do not LIKE ?

Are you becoming the "Fuhrer" of the board ?

Bottom line is that the chap was at all times reasonably polite and if somebody doesn't like what he writes can simply ignore. His "science" is no worse than Anders's and it might actualy be a tad better.

In the end this is a public forum opened to everybody with an interest and in some cases a marketing agenda...Nothing wrong with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, why are you here? Is it a game to see if you can convince people that you know something, without providing any evidence? Or is there some perverse satisfaction in luring people into asking questions, and then not answering them?

Frankenstein's monster went thataway ---------------> :lol:

C'mon David,

Take a step back. Inhale deeply. Etc.

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David,

Sure, I've made a 'choice' to publicly discuss only some details of my acoustics work so far. It's my choice. In perspective, the field of stringed acoustic instrument study is still pretty barren - with few theories

and mostly 'subjective' test procedures scattered about.

As far as demonstrating 'objective' test methods/results is concerned, maybe I'm just very diligent at preparing myself for the level of scrutiny anticipated. Again, my choice.

Have I myself scattered 'hints' here & there? Yes, 'guilty' as charged. Life goes on ... :)

Jim

Jim, the field is not barren at all. A lot of work has been done and it's being done. Please put to us your theory as I am sure you'll find a couple of attentive ears. Anders and Don Noon are serious specialists and David Burgess struck me many times as somebody ( devious ? ) who REALLY knows way more "theory" than he appears to a casual reader. You can not possibly believe that somebody here would steal your ideea. Why not discuss openly your "frequency separation" concept and we might be able to formalize a definition ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yourself, as well, are not saying much if anything, besides the odd sheep joke or trying to bite people who actualy SAY something, at every oportunity.

Yeah, I post a fair amount of garbage, but it's well peppered with good, solid experienced advice. And if I assert something, I'm usually quite willing to back it up. One isolated example: It was asserted that "reptile bulbs" were superior for drying varnish. I claimed (based on having already tried them) that they were less effective, and more expensive than standard BL bulbs. But to provide fresh comparative data, I went out and purchased a reptile bulb, and compared drying times with BL and germicidal bulbs.

If Jim would back up his repeated claims with even a smidgin of that level of supporting evidence, it would seem less like being spammed.

His (Jim's) "science" is no worse than Anders's and it might actualy be a tad better.

:lol: If that's your belief, I guess I won't waste my time bouncing technical ideas off of you! ;)

Are you becoming the "Fuhrer" of the board ?

No. I am a member of The Proud Order Of The Knights Template. :)

One of our primary missions is challenging BS in the fiddle world. We do other cool things too though, like rescuing virgins in distress, and stuff like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jim, the field is not barren at all. A lot of work has been done and it's being done. Please put to us your theory as I am sure you'll find a couple of attentive ears. Anders and Don Noon are serious specialists and David Burgess struck me many times as somebody ( devious ? ) who REALLY knows way more "theory" than he appears to a casual reader. You can not possibly believe that somebody here would steal your ideea. Why not discuss openly your "frequency separation" concept and we might be able to formalize a definition ?

Sure, Carl.

I don't mind discussing these things 'formally' in public. It appears some Board members are on the warpath though [Ahem :huh:]. Apparently, IF one talks formally, there are 'credibility' problems. :blink::D

Anyhow, I'm not saying frequency separation is thee theory. Read on.

The formal "theory" of how acoustic violins actually 'work' is, of course, based on compressed & rarefied air. I won't bore you repeating how string acoustics work 'cause you guys already understand that. So, in simple terms, a violin's geometric shape [3D corpus shape/proportions] instantaneously takes vibrating air from played string frequencies into the corpus where compression occurs. Briefly in regard to 'compression', if you understand the work of Bernoulli and Boyle's Law for example, you'll understand volume/pressure relationships working inside the corpus. You'll understand why there are pressure differentials acting on different parts of the Plate.

Upper & lower ff shapes control frequency separation [between fundamental & harmonics] by maintaining 'particle velocity' relationships. Remember, although a soundwave travels at the speed-of-sound, different frequencies within that soundwave have different particle velocities. That is vital to understanding violin acoustic soundwaves and how frequency separation is maintained.

Effectively, the first Cremonese genius was attempting to use violin StringLength and Corpus shape/proportions to maintain harmonic phase relationships between string vibrations, compressed air, and the rarefied output soundwave. He somewhat succeeded, however, he and the following Copyists apparently weren't sure how to match whole-instrument proportions to arching proportions, hence the lack of correlation between string modes and signature modes for example.

Alrighty then! Rip away!! :lol::lol:

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, Carl.

I don't mind discussing these things 'formally' in public. It appears some Board members are on the warpath though [Ahem :huh:]. Apparently, IF one talks formally, there are 'credibility' problems. :blink::D

Anyhow, I'm not saying frequency separation is thee theory. Read on.

The formal "theory" of how acoustic violins actually 'work' is, of course, based on compressed & rarefied air. I won't bore you repeating how string acoustics work 'cause you guys already understand that. So, in simple terms, a violin's geometric shape [3D corpus shape/proportions] instantaneously takes vibrating air from played string frequencies into the corpus where compression occurs. Briefly in regard to 'compression', if you understand the work of Bernoulli and Boyle's Law for example, you'll understand volume/pressure relationships working inside the corpus. You'll understand why there are pressure differentials acting on different parts of the Plate.

Upper & lower ff shapes control frequency separation [between fundamental & harmonics] by maintaining 'particle velocity' relationships. Remember, although a soundwave travels at the speed-of-sound, different frequencies within that soundwave have different particle velocities. That is vital to understanding violin acoustic soundwaves and how frequency separation is maintained.

Effectively, the first Cremonese genius was attempting to use violin StringLength and Corpus shape/proportions to maintain harmonic phase relationships between string vibrations, compressed air, and the rarefied output soundwave. He somewhat succeeded, however, he and the following Copyists apparently weren't sure how to match whole-instrument proportions to arching proportions, hence the lack of correlation between string modes and signature modes for example.

Alrighty then! Rip away!! :lol::lol:

Jim

Jim, I'm not going to "rip away" anything - it's a good line of thought. You'll find a lot of good stuff in Reyleigh's "Theory of Sound" which is a free d/load from archive.org

I'm going to surprise you but, though I should, I do not know how a string works. Bowed string especially. The more I think about it and the more I torture the computers to simulate it, the more amazed I am of the complexities of such simple a thing.

Anyway, thanks for the reply. It's always nice to communicate despite differences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to comment that it seems that everyone has not only his pet theory, but a healthy degree of scorn for everyone who holds a different one. Perhaps more time should be taken to consider that they might all play a part to some degree or another. For instance, thinking of myself here, I'm finding the speaker model to be quite useful these days for several aspects of how a violin works, but I realize, also, that it's not a full explanation of how the machine works.

It, and many other ideas have received their share of ridicule here, and I think that's too bad that people think they should be ridiculing what they, from their tiny corner of infinite wisdom, think is heresy in the violin making religion. [Please notice, also, the extent to which I have attempted to cure my self of that particular problem in the last year or so.]

Though he's too obscure for my taste, the Murph has been suggesting for some time that air and how it interacts with the natural frequencies of various mechanical parts of the violin may play some part in the drama. Is that really all that silly of an idea that he needs to be slapped down at every opportunity?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a member of The Proud Order Of The Knights Template. :)

... our primary mission of challenging BS in the fiddle business...

Undoubtedly the order was founded by Sisyphus.

I'm too lazy to join the organization; I usually prefer to choose a different path, rather than walk behind cattle known to frequently drop steaming loads of the stuff.

Uh-oh... heres another one! :o Sorry... this one just dropped right in front of me, so I have to do something. :)

The formal "theory" of how acoustic violins actually 'work' is ...(bla bla bla)... hence the lack of correlation between string modes and signature modes for example.

Never made sense the first time, and still doesn't. My opinon, of course. Previous debate has led nowhere, so I'll just leave it at that.

Is that really all that silly of an idea that he needs to be slapped down at every opportunity?

Yes and no...

When ideas are proposed that are at odds with the workings physics and acoustics as I understand them, I feel some responsibility to say something, rather than allow implied crediblity by staying silent. It's not an ego thing... I'm just trying to share what I can of my technical background for those who might be interested. So, yes: in my view, it IS a silly idea.

However, as Mr. Molnar so elequently stated, there isn't much point in going through this routine every time it comes up. So that's a no for the second half of the question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr Burgess, this is my 1st post here but I read "The Pegbox" for quite a while. I'm in South Africa by the way - not much violin making going around here.

I think you're a bit hard on the chap, he's not even close to being as obnoxious as Lyndon ( Zulu...), Anders Buen or John Masters at their best. Yourself, as well, are not saying much if anything, besides the odd sheep joke or trying to bite people who actualy SAY something, at every oportunity. What's this nonsense about banning people you do not LIKE ?

Are you becoming the "Fuhrer" of the board ?

Bottom line is that the chap was at all times reasonably polite and if somebody doesn't like what he writes can simply ignore. His "science" is no worse than Anders's and it might actualy be a tad better.

In the end this is a public forum opened to everybody with an interest and in some cases a marketing agenda...Nothing wrong with that.

I think the level of content you show here needs to be beacked up with you writing under your real name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good one ! I know what it means : you've discovered something really exciting about chaotic oscillators while reading Poincare and you want to discuss it with me. Why not ?

+++++++++

Poincare , Newton, Einstein were the wise men we have ever known. Do I forget anyone? Bacon ?

Should I include Obama?

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...