Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Does age matter?


joerobson

Recommended Posts

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.

Are you sure you won't reconsider? It's not as bad it sounds. Members are issued poo-wading boots, and masks with activated charcoal filters. And we're working on a new strategy... attacking the enemy from the front, where there is presumably less poo. :)

Knight Dave,

Recruiting Officer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you sure you won't reconsider? It's not as bad it sounds. Members are issued poo-wading boots, and masks with activated charcoal filters. And we're working on a new strategy... attacking the enemy from the front. :)

Knight Dave,

Recruiting Officer

I'm interested but somehow worried about the innitiation rituals. I hope we stick to HAND shakes and the "attack from the front" is purely symbolic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm interested but somehow worried about the innitiation rituals. I hope we stick to HAND shakes and the "attack from the front" is purely symbolic.

That's a battle strategy. Initiation is way tougher.

One ritual, which is a validation of endurance, pain tolerance, and resistance to spilling secrets under torture:

The inductee must stand at attention without passing out, while The Assembled Knights play Twinkle Twinkle on 1/16 size violins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a battle strategy. Initiation is way tougher.

One ritual, which is a validation of endurance, pain tolerance, and resistance to spilling secrets under torture:

The inductee must stand at attention without passing out, while The Assembled Knights play Twinkle Twinkle on 1/16 size violins.

Unusual and cruel is this ritual, indeed but I believe I can take it. Will I be called an enetered aprentice ? Do we have working tools and tracing boards ?

And the most important thing : what's the fees and can we drink ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Alright Don.

It's gut check time! The Maestronet community is anxious to hear at least one 'formal' sensible acoustic theory from the other side [You, David, et al].

That old rocking bridge "physics and acoustics" theory doesn't address compressed & rarefied air which is what acoustics is really all about.

It doesn't explain why resonant modes are where they are. Doesn't explain anything about particle velocities and frequency separation [in either those terms or other] which are very important for maintaining fundamental and harmonic frequency relationships. All this 'tapping' and radiation ratio stuff just doesn't make sense, unless one is beating a percussion drum instrument for higher dB response rather than playing an arched acoustic violin.

IF you guys have an acoustic theory for how violins actually work, please share that brief formal theory, now.

Thank you,

Jim

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.

Hear, hear!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's gut check time! The Maestronet community is anxious to hear at least one 'formal' sensible acoustic theory from the other side [You, David, et al].

One of the challenges is that you seem to have your own definitions for words. What is a "formal" acoustic theory?

That old rocking bridge "physics and acoustics" theory doesn't address compressed & rarefied air which is what acoustics is really all about.

On the contrary, bridge rocking motion is probably the one which illustrates compressed and rarefied air most easily and conveniently. It's quite easy to connect bridge rocking motion to the interior volume change at certain low frequencies... sort of a "bellows" motion, which does involve compressed and rarefied air. If you don't believe me, this is easily measured. But are you thinking that if the rocking bridge fails to explain everything, that it is invalid? Good grief, that is only one of many well-documented bridge motions.

IF you guys have an acoustic theory for how violins actually work, please share that brief formal theory, now.

I've had many (infomal?) thoeries, and some of them sounded excellent on paper, but most of them didn't pan out when when I actually tested them on instruments, which is what I'm encouraging you to do. I suppose I could have hinted at them or posted them here prior to validation, but ultimately, that would just have led people astray, or on a wild goose chase. Know what I'm saying? ;)

Good grief, I can't believe I got sucked into this again, and I realize that it's probably just a colossal waste of time! But I'll echo Don's dilemma: What is an appropriate course of action when someone puts up incorrect or misleading information? Let it stand, at the risk that it may mislead someone who hasn't delved into these matters more?

So there, I gave a serious response, but it was probably more productive just to joke around. :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Maestronet community is anxious to hear at least one 'formal' sensible acoustic theory from the other side

This thread has been dragged waaaay off-topic. If the Maestronet community is really interested in this, someone should start another thread. Probably about as useful as convening a debate between Democrats and "tea party" members about their views of the budget... and about as entertaining (sigh).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is a "formal" acoustic theory?

Simply provide a brief explanation of the reigning violin acoustic theory describing what the corpus is actually doing to played string frequencies.

On the contrary, bridge rocking motion is probably the one which illustrates compressed and rarefied air most easily and conveniently. It's quite easy to connect bridge rocking motion to the interior volume change at certain low frequencies... sort of a "bellows" motion, which does involve compressed and rarefied air. If you don't believe me, this is easily measured. But are you thinking that if the rocking bridge fails to explain everything, that it is invalid? Good grief, that is only one of many well-documented bridge motions.

The bridge of course has motion/vibrates. The main 'problem' with the rocking bridge theory is the suggestion all that up/down herky-jerky corpus movement [as seen in modal analysis animations] is what's causing coordinated air compression. That is something I will prove when we finally meet for some 'objective' testing/analysis on one from the other side and one of mine.

... I'll echo Don's dilemma: What is an appropriate course of action when someone puts up incorrect or misleading information? Let it stand, at the risk that it may mislead someone who hasn't delved into these matters more?

David, so you do understand how "I" feel about all the yapping about tapping, Dünnwald regions, dB emphasis, etc. [it's all a matter of perspective, isn't it? :) ]

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets get this thread back on track. Old wood does not let light through it like fresh wood does. I think this property will stillbe there for a violin top if it has been carved using old wood. The Moes use old wood in their instruments. I once measured two old wood samples, they had very high soundspeeds, but I do not remember if I had set the humidity correction too high in my Lucci meter at that time, giving too high readings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread has been dragged waaaay off-topic. If the Maestronet community is really interested in this, someone should start another thread. Probably about as useful as convening a debate between Democrats and "tea party" members about their views of the budget... and about as entertaining (sigh).

Well said Don ! It is somehow irritating when threads fly off the innitial path. And confusing. Let's start a new one now. I'm quite sure Jim won't mind a bit of polite CONSTRUCTIVE criticism and others ( like myself ) would wellcome learning a few new things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conversation with self:

"Nope, not goin' there. Be strong, David. It will only waste your time, will not resolve or settle anything, and Jim will go right back to posting the same old stuff he always has."

Well, it's settled then ... I've got the reigning violin acoustic theory. :lol:

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets get this thread back on track. Old wood does not let light through it like fresh wood does. I think this property will stillbe there for a violin top if it has been carved using old wood.

On my #5 violin I used sortof-old wood; 40+ years old maple, and ~25 year old spruce. The maple was darkened to ~2mm deep, and the spruce much less. Once I carved away that layer, it looked perfectly new. And I think it sounds new,too.

Conversation with self:

"Nope, not goin' there. Be strong, David. It will only waste your time, will not resolve or settle anything, and Jim will go right back to posting the same old stuff he always has."

Viewed as a contest of logic with Jim, yes, I agree that nothing will change. However, there might be other MN'ers interested in seeing contrasting views in one place (and we can reference it if the topic comes up again).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simply provide a brief explanation of the reigning violin acoustic theory describing what the corpus is actually doing to played string frequencies.

That is very simple. The violin body is the amplifier and the "loudspeaker" of the string signal. The effect the body has on the strings are usually practically unimportant, unless we are close to a wolf note. To some extent the body motion will set a limit for the needed bow force to get the bowed Helmholz kink string signal going. So the body resonances do to some extent affect the bowed string, especially at a wolf note. This is well known by most makers and violin acoustics researchers. The body acts as a linear system where any movement of the body can be described by a weighed sum of the body and assembly modes. The bowed string system is highly nonlinear and the physics behind it was only quite recently fully understood. According to Woodhouse the bowed string is yet the only well understood "slip stick" driven self oscillating system.

The bridge of course has motion/vibrates. The main 'problem' with the rocking bridge theory is the suggestion all that up/down herky-jerky corpus movement [as seen in modal analysis animations] is what's causing coordinated air compression. That is something I will prove when we finally meet for some 'objective' testing/analysis on one from the other side and one of mine.

Of course the interiour air is driven by the plate movement, Jansson described this back in the early 1970ties. Nothing new. Maybe even Hutchins described it. Any room no matter the size will have its resonances, so also the interiour of a violin body. But the walls move so any geometrical calulcations to explain their exact position on the frequency scale will not be very accurate.

David, so you do understand how "I" feel about all the yapping about tapping, Dünnwald regions, dB emphasis, etc. [it's all a matter of perspective, isn't it? :) ]

If you want to ramble on these factors I guess I am the right one to address. It was puzzling to see that the Betts was adjusted in such a manner at Oberlin that it got higher values on the Dünnwald parameters. Strange isn't it?

Edited by Anders Buen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bridge of course has motion/vibrates. The main 'problem' with the rocking bridge theory is the suggestion all that up/down herky-jerky corpus movement [as seen in modal analysis animations] is what's causing coordinated air compression. That is something I will prove when we finally meet for some 'objective' testing/analysis on one from the other side and one of mine.

Of course the interiour air is driven by the plate movement, Jansson described this back in the early 1970ties. Nothing new. Maybe even Hutchins described it. Any room no matter the size will have its resonances, so also the interiour of a violin body. But the walls move so any geometrical calulcations to explain their exact position on the frequency scale will not be very accurate.

Anders,

I'm going to prove that interpretation is a 'problem', or disprove their interpretation of how compression 'works'. Same difference [but opposite of what you thought I said].

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bowed string system is highly nonlinear and the physics behind it was only quite recently fully understood. According to Woodhouse the bowed string is yet the only well understood "slip stick" driven self oscillating system.

I recall an interesting article in popular science in the mid-late '60s entitled "The Physics of the Bowed String" which described the basic "goings on" pretty well. Anyone else seen this article?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recall an interesting article in popular science in the mid-late '60s entitled "The Physics of the Bowed String" which described the basic "goings on" pretty well. Anyone else seen this article?

Perhaps Scientific American, January 1974, pg 87, by John Schelleng?

post-24063-0-65602900-1311973273_thumb.jpg

Edit: I seem to be unable to get a low-res scan of this today. Could be a Friday effect. Or maybe a Faraday effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps Scientific American, January 1974, pg 87, by John Schelleng?

post-24063-0-65602900-1311973273_thumb.j

Edit: I seem to be unable to get a low-res scan of this today. Could be a Friday effect. Or maybe a Faraday effect.

Could be... though I seem to remember the article I was speaking of was published before that date... maybe my memory isn't up to snuff today. Could just be age, eh? :-)

Is there more to it (I assume so...)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could be... though I seem to remember the article I was speaking of was published before that date... maybe my memory isn't up to snuff today. Could just be age, eh? :-)

Is there more to it (I assume so...)?

It is a fairly generic title and very impressive sounding, so quite possibly used before and after.

9 pages in the story, just thought the first page might be enough to confirm or not. Guess not. Anyway, it was the story I thought of when you mentioned the title.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a fairly generic title and very impressive sounding, so quite possibly used before and after.

9 pages in the story, just thought the first page might be enough to confirm or not. Guess not. Anyway, it was the story I thought of when you mentioned the title.

You may have it... I recall some diagrams that have stuck with me, but I assume they aren't on the first page. :) Is this article archived somewhere online?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may have it... I recall some diagrams that have stuck with me, but I assume they aren't on the first page. :) Is this article archived somewhere online?

Lots of sawtooth graphs, both stick figure and oscilloscope output. I don't know if it's on-line. Just happen to have the magazine on my bookshelf.

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...