Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Secret Knowledge and violins


Craig Tucker
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 630
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Thanks Devil,

 

It's certainly more satisfying to discuss exactly what construction is at play, rather than the roots of the premise.

 

 

Here are drawings comparing the fit of your 2 5 2 vesica construction versus my proposed 2 1 2 vesici, or 1 3 1 in your notation.

 

1 3 1  vesica fit:

 

post-30802-0-17653800-1442208178_thumb.jpg

 

 

2 5 2 vesica fit:

 

post-30802-0-11065000-1442208195_thumb.jpg

 

 

I have to concede that your suggesting is a cleaner fit, though less basic in concept.

 

Variations in proportions and application, using a relatively traditional and constant construction.  That seems to be the old Cremona way.

 

As seen in these examples, the variations can be subtle.   With vesici, the closer the circle centers, the more round the final construction.   The wider apart, the more squat the construction ends up.

 

Your proposal is just slightly more squat than the 1 3 1 construction I was using. 

 

Thanks Devil!    Do a have to give part of my soul now in exchange for your help??

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to upper vesicas, I'm confidant that if vesicas were indeed being used, they were the first on the scene in Cremona.  If you look at a tracing of an A. Amati/Bros, or have a corrected photo to compare to purfling, they're all a 1-3-1/2-1-2.  Nicolo uses a 1-2-1, but modifies it, then Strad changes everything.  So I agree, Strad's upper bout is much more complex in concept, although it uses the same principle.

 

Now the Brescians are a different matter.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Torbjorn,

 

You've made me think about this idea for a few days.   When I first read your numbers, I initially accepted your premise that the anvil was set higher than center.   However, upon consideration, I don't think that valid.

 

By your own numbers, 29mm v 26mm, you place the anvil at CENTER +/- 1.5mm.

 

I do believe that in concept the anvil is located at the logical center point.   All other info I can find agrees with this center position to an equal or greater precision than your own measurement.

 

attachicon.gifAddie's Punch.jpg  attachicon.gifStradivari_Thickness.jpg

 

 

attachicon.gifStrad punch from Addie.jpg

 

 

My own copy of the Strad punch has the anvil in basically the same place.    As I said before, I've used my punch to make my first two plates inside first, then all since I've made on the same punch working outside first.    In my opinion, the anvil height on the Strad punch does not favor either approach over the other.

 

Also, as said earlier, I don't particularly have a bias either way, as I started my work and my research adopting an inside first working hypothesis.  However, I allowed the historical evidence to change my position to outside first for Cremona Tradition work.

 

It still seems possible to me that an inside first concept my have come before that, perhaps with some other early Brescian viola makers like Zannetto?   Or perhaps with even earlier formative instruments with arched plates before the violin??   However, I now am inclined toward the hypothesis that at least starting with A Amati, the Cremona arching work was outside first.

Hi David,

 

I don't have much time at the moment, but just a short comment. My measurements were taken directly from the punch and not from photos. The fact is that the anvil is the taller part by any measurements. I wrote the article because the evidence that I see points toward the inside first. Even the shape of Cremonese arches suggest an inside first approach. It's the only way they all make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...... Even the shape of Cremonese arches suggest an inside first approach. It's the only way they all make sense.

If anybody lays down a set of pre-made templates it will be obvious to start on the outside first.  Then use punch plate to check depths on outside of plate to perfect the template profile.  Then work on the inside and when close, use the punch for inside graduation finishing up.  The bad thing is the dimples left on the outside- what can you do except use water and steam to smooth them out.  I'm a rookie when it comes to shaping contours but it's common sense by observation to start the outer first.  The deal back then was hurry up and get them out the door to put food on the table or hurry up and get done so that his hot date day with a lady customer would approach sooner.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suggest that people read F. Denis' book on drawing the shape of Stradivari's forms. It is not just a matter of curve-fitting, but studying the old geometrical layouts. There you will recognize how arcs are blended.

 

When proposing a theory, a researcher must know the literature, namely what others have said. Otherwise, we get a situation where no one is listening and everyone is just talking.  :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

..... The punch and the cradle are from the Cerani collection, not the Fiorini collection. The Stradivari provenance is not as rock-solid for the Cerani items.

............

Addie = back from vacation.

I share the doubts of Addie, the origin of that tool has not yet been clarified, but in my opinion is more likely to come from the workshop of Ceruti and not of Stradivari.

Of course this does not exclude that Stradivari may have used a similar one (I also think so), but I would go cautiously in reconstructing working methods starting from clues at least of uncertain origin (it is noteworthy that also the purfling cutters share probably the same origin and the same story).

But probably if we expected to have certainty, you may never make new theories, which are always interesting to consider to make new thinking.

This is why I appreciate the work of Torbjorn about the thickness gauge, made me think even if I have not reached the same conclusions, although I can never be sure of which is the right one...... :rolleyes:

 

Davide (also back from vacation)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suggest that people read F. Denis' book on drawing the shape of Stradivari's forms. It is not just a matter of curve-fitting, but studying the old geometrical layouts. There you will recognize how arcs are blended.

 

When proposing a theory, a researcher must know the literature, namely what others have said. Otherwise, we get a situation where no one is listening and everyone is just talking.  :blink:

 

 

You're right.  I used to think the violin's rib shape was originally the same as a bent rib shape as seen in the attached photo.

 

But this is too simple an idea to write a book about and  It couldn't possibly be the original method for generating the violin outline shapes because masking tape is a recent invention.

post-44223-0-28596900-1442241049_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I share the doubts of Addie, the origin of that tool has not yet been clarified, but in my opinion is more likely to come from the workshop of Ceruti and not of Stradivari.

Of course this does not exclude that Stradivari may have used a similar one (I also think so), but I would go cautiously in reconstructing working methods starting from clues at least of uncertain origin (it is noteworthy that also the purfling cutters share probably the same origin and the same story).

But probably if we expected to have certainty, you may never make new theories, which are always interesting to consider to make new thinking.

This is why I appreciate the work of Torbjorn about the thickness gauge, made me think even if I have not reached the same conclusions, although I can never be sure of which is the right one...... :rolleyes:

 

Davide (also back from vacation)

Hi Davide,

Then you have this:

post-24030-0-49911200-1442244670_thumb.png

From the book, The Girolamo Amati Viola

in the GALLERIA ESTENSE

 

A quote from my article:

"3. REMAINS OF SPIKE HOLES UNDER VARNISH

As a result of the work process, tiny dents from the thicknessing spike

sometimes remain in the arch of classic Cremonese instruments. They

disappear in the finishing process, only to appear again when the

varnish is added.

I first became aware of them in my own instruments, and they

are more evident on the bellies. Although they have been filled with

dirt in most classic instruments, in some pristine examples you can

see them filled with varnish, which shows that they were present

before the varnish was applied."

 

I could only dream of such images back when I wrote the article, but there it is.

 

Best, Torbjörn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Davide,

Then you have this:

attachicon.gifSpikeholes Girolamo Amati.png

From the book, The Girolamo Amati Viola

in the GALLERIA ESTENSE

 

A quote from my article:

"3. REMAINS OF SPIKE HOLES UNDER VARNISH

As a result of the work process, tiny dents from the thicknessing spike

sometimes remain in the arch of classic Cremonese instruments. They

disappear in the finishing process, only to appear again when the

varnish is added.

I first became aware of them in my own instruments, and they

are more evident on the bellies. Although they have been filled with

dirt in most classic instruments, in some pristine examples you can

see them filled with varnish, which shows that they were present

before the varnish was applied."

 

I could only dream of such images back when I wrote the article, but there it is.

 

Best, Torbjörn

I assume you are referring to the upper right part of the top, and if these are indeed marks left by the spike that is definitely in favor of your theory.

But how do you can be so sure?

I had also noticed them but perhaps the cause is different, who really knows.........and this brings us back to the beginning, everyone interprets the marks according to its theory.
Anyway congratulations for your excellent observation skills. B)
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I share the doubts of Addie, the origin of that tool has not yet been clarified, but in my opinion is more likely to come from the workshop of Ceruti and not of Stradivari.

 

Davide (also back from vacation)

Also included in the Ceruti/Cerani collection are the purfling markers/cutters.  A great deal of attention has been paid to these, in reconstructing Stradivari's working methods.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also included in the Ceruti/Cerani collection are the purfling markers/cutters.  A great deal of attention has been paid to these, in reconstructing Stradivari's working methods.

 

Yes, and with their depth stop for the cutting blade are one of the pillars of the purfling with closed box system...... :ph34r:

Is not to deny everything, I also believe that they cut the purfling with the closed box, but every theory has its weak points

Link to comment
Share on other sites

post-30802-0-02282800-1442260405_thumb.jpg

 

post-30802-0-83402600-1442260424_thumb.jpg

 

 

Evidence from Darnton of such punches being used on the inside of plates.   Dimples showing on the cello back are presumed to be from the punch anvil.

 

 

 

In my own work, I use the punch on the outside to establish the initial plate height.   And I use it some in setting some control heights here and there on the long arch, and sometimes in cross arching.   So I can end up with a small number of punch marks on the outside of my plates, even though I work outside first.   An of course, most of my punches are on the inside as I work the thickness later on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I assume you are referring to the upper right part of the top, and if these are indeed marks left by the spike that is definitely in favor of your theory.

But how do you can be so sure?

I had also noticed them but perhaps the cause is different, who really knows.........and this brings us back to the beginning, everyone interprets the marks according to its theory.
Anyway congratulations for your excellent observation skills. B)
 

 

I said that I discovered them first in my own instruments, so I know what they are. That's exactly what they look like. Now you can go and look for them in other instruments. If you have good eyes you'll find them because they're prevalent.

 

Are these original marks, or from someone's regraduation efforts?

My question too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point is that this particular kind of evidence is not conclusive for either a inside first or an outside first theory.

 

In my own work, I'm not using templates, but definitely working outside first.  Yet, I use the punch to some degree on both sides of the plate.   So someone looking closely could find both kinds of evidence on my plates. 

 

But also, just like the examples shown, my punches on the outside are fewer and sparse, while the ones on the inside are many.

 

--Burgess,  how could I know that?    I believe someone made the case that varnish had collected in the cello dimples.  But that's probably a hard case to make effectively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point is that this particular kind of evidence is not conclusive for either a inside first or an outside first theory.

 

In my own work, I'm not using templates, but definitely working outside first.  Yet, I use the punch to some degree on both sides of the plate.   So someone looking closely could find both kinds of evidence on my plates. 

 

But also, just like the examples shown, my punches on the outside are fewer and sparse, while the ones on the inside are many.

 

--Burgess,  how could I know that?    I believe someone made the case that varnish had collected in the cello dimples.  But that's probably a hard case to make effectively.

David, are they spread randomly or in a particular place? Where are we most likely to find the marks in your instruments?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I use the punch everywhere on the concave inside of the plates.  On the outside, mostly in the channel and around the apex of arching in the bridge area. 

 

However, it also gets used to a lessor extent in the cross arching.  Since I'm not using templates, I'm using the combination of the long arch, the channel, and my 1/2 fall in 2/3 run rule.    These things help me identify several various specific heights at some locations that I can check with a punch on the outside.  These spots mostly are along the margin of the channel area, then 1/3 in toward the center line from there, then 1/3 again from that location, then 1/3 again from that location, etc.   It ends up with a scattering all around the plate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, here we go.

Once again.

 

Any and everybody that actually makes violins today, (or... so I have found - in general), will arrive at a, or some specific "formula" for making them - . 

...that we are all probably taught (I am supposing here) a specific method - I believe that we all eventually arrive at our own.

I'm thinking that most of us end up, eventually deciding, on our own, what "the correct" method for arriving at the exact thickness, and arching or 'curvature' for the plate(s) is.

 

Within certain parameters - that is, given the specific (exact) outline of the plates - from a building plan or Strad poster, for example - we all know 'about' what the thickness is going to be - the thickness plan that we are going to use, and what the plate surface arching or curvature should look like. Taken usually from examples from the past.

 

 - the placing of a standard fingerboard, bridge, strings, tailpiece, and all the rest, is going to decide for us, generally what the arch is going to be - and the bridge will determine exactly how high the top plates arch is going to be - and etc.

 

That the wood we are using, is going to be "exactly what it is", and what it is, is going to help determine exactly what it, the plate, should be shaped and thickness-ed like - in order to respond correctly, well, there is no one formula extant today, that gives us 'the' or 'a' correct answer, for the "correct" thickness and or arching for any particular violins plates.

 

Is there?

 

And they are all going to be different. And, I see that we all end up making them (violins - that is) just a bit differently.

Perhaps the reason why we attempt to make violins like the old masters made them, is that we are attempting to arrive at a workable system for the sound they (can) emit. 

That they (the violins that we copy) often, or that they may, have a quality that we cannot engineer into our own new violins, is simply the usual fact.

We cannot engineer in, for example; age.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

gizmomonster,

Are you toying with our emotions?

Or - do you really have a Tauscher violin arriving soon from Tarisio?

Not that I would even bother to read the notices fine print, as I've read such crap-o-la before on different occasions, and in many and various, slightly different forms...

 

But - I would be immensely interested in your opinion of the violin.

Were you joking with us (which I would understand completely) or, are you going to receive this violin soon?

 

Interesting...

 

If you are, I'd like to hear your assessment of it. Would you mind?

 

Here are pictures to prove I have it. It was lot #98 at Tarisio.

 

I like it so far. It has a very rich and deep tone and has good projection. The sound is not muddied.I ended up stringing it up with Evah Pirazzi Golds. My daughter's teacher liked it and said to definitely keep it.

 

What's your interest? was it yours or did you want it, and bid on it?

post-78436-0-91270200-1446514525_thumb.jpg

post-78436-0-09472600-1446514557_thumb.jpg

post-78436-0-25819800-1446514584_thumb.jpg

post-78436-0-11690000-1446514613_thumb.jpg

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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...