Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Violin versus Hardanger fiddle neck


Anders Buen

Recommended Posts

I documented the working steps of taking off the fingerboard, the pegs and the neck of a Guarneri model chinese violin today. Then I mounted a Hardanger fiddle neck and temporarily some pegs. The steps are all documented using admittance measurements in my rig.

The steps affected the modes like this:

Strings and bridge off: B1-: 2 Hz change B1+: +16Hz. A0 became a bit stronger. The hammer hits are now downward on the top instead of sideways on the G string side of the bridge, but the accelerometer is in the same position.

Fingerboard off:

B1- and B1+: Increased 6 Hz but B1- became a little stronger while the B1+ became a little weaker. A mode around 850 Hz splitted when he fingerbaord was taken off. That note is singing while playing the a on the e string. (A narrow resonance there, possibly the ringing source or maybe it is the lack of resonances for some of the harmonics?)

Pegs off:

The modes moved up some 2-3 Hz only. The splitted mode around 850 Hz became one top, but with two smaller tops to each side.

Neck off (only the body):

B1-: Went up another 13-16Hz and became some 5 dB stronger. B1+: up some 30 Hz, but became about 5 dB weaker. Mode around 850 Hz splitted again.

With hardanger fiddle neck:

B1-: down some 10 Hz in relation to the same situation with a violin neck. B1+: - 5 Hz and the balance between the B1- and B1+ again became in favour of the B1+.

Hardanger neck with temporary pegs:

B1-: -14 Hz, B1+: - 18 Hz and the B1+ became splitted.

I will post the spectra below. First the steps with the violin neck then comparing the spectra with hardanger fiddle neck and violin neck with and without pegs.

The lesson learnt from this is that the heavier and different hardanger fiddle neck lowers the signature modes as I have expected for a while. But the other modes are less affected. Also the other modes, except the B1 modes, can be asessed with no neck in place. So working e.g. on edgework on a body will give information that also will be there in the assembled and strung up violin.

post-25136-0-17020400-1326583755_thumb.jpg

post-25136-0-66984300-1326583773_thumb.jpg

post-25136-0-06280700-1326583794_thumb.jpg

post-25136-0-84807400-1326583811_thumb.jpg

post-25136-0-26383100-1326583841_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Anders.

Both my measuring method and understanding are very sloppy compared to yours.

I've never compared a body with a violin- vs. hardanger neck.

But I've recorded taps with a rubbered hammer against the left bridge foot position from:

just body

to:

body with neck/fingerboard with pegs.

My blue and green curve should be the same stages as yours blue and orange in your first graph, but mine is with a hardanger fiddle neck with Wittner geared pegs. Much heavier.

My results are quite different from yours.

(So I wouldn't mind you saying I'm better off making fiddles than measurements and graphs :P )

post-29099-0-62277700-1326614299_thumb.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Salve!

I guess you show data from a fine Hardanger fiddle, while mine is a rather stiff chinese built Guarneri model violin. E.g. the B1 modes are yet almost 100Hz higher than normal for a Hardanger fiddle. I am planning to regraduate it, but will test it with hardanger fiddle strings first.

I think some details of the seen changes may vary a bit from instrument to instrument. I guess we need a larger set of data to draw safe conclucions on what happens, but then we might be able to see typical trends.

I have used an accelerometer signal while you use the mic signal. That way you get more information on the sound radiation, of course. Not all accelerance tops will become radiation tops in the spectra, and the lowest frequencies are more pronounced in the sound spectra.

I enclose a comparison of the accelerance signal and the sound radiation tapping over the bassbar bridge foot position. Sorry about the "not so contrastful colours" on the curves. We see that the A0 is about 17dB, or so, more efficient a radiator as compared to e.g. the first major body mode B1-. Not all accelerance peaks become sound radiation peaks, but a few does. The mid and higher range becomes more emphasized if the hammering is done on the soundpost side. Then the low end becomes rather weak.

post-25136-0-24145800-1326622689_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had real problems with the wittner pegs on understrings - if you're using understrings less than .30 they can easily fall into a gap between the shaft and the revolving barrel, and when you finally get them out they tend to be snarled.

It should be possible to avoid the problem by making sure each peg is fitted with this problem in mind, keening that gap away from where the string will be wound on the shaft. But it's a fiddly business!

Our solution has been a specially designed tailpiece with hill style fine-tuners for the understrings - but I worry about the effect of a bulky ebony object on the sound.

I don't know if I should be worrying about afterstring length with hardangers - it seems that all the well set-up instruments I see have very short afterstring lengths, and presumably this contributes positively to damping the principal strings?

post-34919-0-19152500-1326656017_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our solution has been a specially designed tailpiece with hill style fine-tuners for the understrings - but I worry about the effect of a bulky ebony object on the sound.

I don't know if I should be worrying about afterstring length with hardangers - it seems that all the well set-up instruments I see have very short afterstring lengths, and presumably this contributes positively to damping the principal strings?

post-34919-0-19152500-1326656017_thumb.jpg

I think I have seen a similar solution on swedish understring fiddles. Some of these are with 10 strings. I do not think that the afterlength is so important per se, but rather the tailpiece modes. The variables are the length of the tailgut, the weight distribution of the tailpiece and the afterlength.

I do not like the tailpiece too close to the bridge, but a short tailgut is not a good solution on my fiddles. I use metal thread for the tailgut so the effect of that might be different from a softer kevlar thread or something else. I also like the string hooks for the playing strings to be at an equal length to the understring hooks and the fine tuner for the e-string. I do not know if that is a better solution than anything else. But it will probaly have an effect on the tailpiece modes. Different attachment points to the tialpiece is going to affect the modes, possibly damping some of them. So then comes the question is it good to damp them or not? Where are they good and where are they less good to have?

Maybe the answers to these questions may depend on the fiddle at hand. My experience is that the I can get tp modes interacting with the playing range, and possibly the decay time of the much used drone-ish played open g string.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I think we probably need to experiment on a specific instrument.

I also use metal wire .... makes minor adjustments more difficult of course!

I started out from a very specific observation - that unless the understrings were perfectly in tune they couldn't function well, and that ease of understring tuning was really the first order problem with hardangers ... particularly in the non-traditional situation where someone is playing in a band.

My own experience of traditional hardangers (and of the performances of others) was that by the time you'd plucked the understring and made it back to the top of the neck the sound had died away to the point where you couldn't hear it. These fine tuners have made that process laughably easy, even in difficult situations where others are playing - so the result is more playing, less tuning, and of course more sympathetic vibration. If there's a trade-off in the effect of the tailpiece modes it may be worth it for the accuracy of tuning?

But now I'm looking to learn more about how to control the balance between understrings and principal strings, and I think I have a lot to learn!

It seems that, as with violins, the essential issues are arching and thicknessing, but I suppose all aspects of set-up are going to have an effect. But that's a different thread - I didn't mean to hijack yours ......

just wanted to say that the Wittners are a reasonable solution but not without their own problems!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started out from a very specific observation - that unless the understrings were perfectly in tune they couldn't function well, and that ease of understring tuning was really the first order problem with hardangers ... particularly in the non-traditional situation where someone is playing in a band.

Yes having them in tune is important. Some players will put the neck against their head, so there will be some bone conduction. Helps when there is a lot os sound around in the room.

My own experience of traditional hardangers (and of the performances of others) was that by the time you'd plucked the understring and made it back to the top of the neck the sound had died away to the point where you couldn't hear it.

The traditional way of doing it is to have one finger on the understring and the other on the tuning peg so there is more or less maximum signal and tuning at the same time. I see your point, as have the Swedish makers. I am perfectly happy with normal pegs, but I want to try the Wittner geared pegs now for fun. I am a bit reluctant to adding so much mass to the tailpiece of an insturment that normally is compareable to violins in weight, in spite of the larger amount of pegs and more mass in the neck. But maybe some time I might try it. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had real problems with the wittner pegs on understrings - if you're using understrings less than .30 they can easily fall into a gap between the shaft and the revolving barrel, and when you finally get them out they tend to be snarled.

An additional problem is that normal ebony pegs can be pulled out a little to enter the string into the hole, whereas the geared pegs should stay put. Therefore the other strings may make access to the string-hole difficult.

I still use them, and players trying them for the first time, usually get euphoric!

But I give a sheet to all buyers where I explain difficulties, so they may avoid trouble. It's here, but in Norwegian (nynorsk).

I'll have to make an english translation soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. I like it! Is weight of the tailpiece really a problem with all those spaces?

2. One other thing that would help would be perfect pegs, but I don't think I've ever seen a really good peg for on an understring. Or at least the pegs are never really good enough for steel strings.

3. And to make it worse, all the strings are connected. If you tune a string, it moves the bridge a little and affects all the understrings.

4. One problem when tuning is that the pitch of a steel string depends a lot on the amplitude. If you pluck it loud enough to hear it easily, the pitch will be too high. So you have to catch it just at the moment just before they stop vibrating. I usually tune them partly by feel. If an understring vibrates strongly when you pluck the "overstring", then it's in tune.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the weight is probably less than with a traditional tailpiece (not necessarily a good thing) ...

Interestingly I have a Gyoveland Hardanger which has wound understrings - they work very well and are quite easy to tune with standard ebony pegs.

I certainly felt that the old 2 hook system for understrings was very unfortunate and unstable - I may have slightly re-invented the wheel, but I just felt that precise tuning of understrings WAS the Hardanger sound, and that I might as well get that right first, in a way that a lowly Scottish fiddler could handle!

The tailpiece I've posted is a bit too big, but it's quite an engineering challenge to get everything happening in a smaller unit - we've decided to abandon the 5th understring, so that will help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Is the 2nd understring hitting the A string?

2. What kind of strings are those? Lots of Hardanger fiddlers would like to know.

3. Why not use a Hill-style tuner for the E string? You get the same string length that way.

4. You're right on the mark, that tuning understrings is by far the biggest equipment problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. You sharp-eyed b**tard - yes, this is a prototype and the spacing is critical, we got the hole for the A string slightly off centre, but actually the understrings are under such minimal tension it doesn't matter. The solution is a bit more of a ramp for the platform that the principal strings sit on .... it's all a lot easier with 4 understrings

2. The understrings are mandolin strings, plain wire, principal strings are Thomastik Vision 3/4 violin strings - not gut but cheap! We use Hardanger strings in most cases, but a few fiddle to hardanger converts prefer violin strings

3. It was a temporary set-up, didn't want to take the ball off the E string, but yes, Hill-style are better in every case ...

4. I would love to start experimenting with bridge design and plate thickness etc, but it seemed to me that first I had to be able to get the damn thing in tune, without tearing all my hair out. Unless you can keep the instrument in tune or get it back in tune easily, all other experiments are very difficult

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2. The understrings are mandolin strings, plain wire, principal strings are Thomastik Vision 3/4 violin strings - not gut but cheap! We use Hardanger strings in most cases, but a few fiddle to hardanger converts prefer violin strings

What thickness are the understrings then? The traditional is somewhere between 0.22mm and 0.30mm.

I use Vikens 0.24mm, 0.26mm. 0.28mm 0.30mm and 0.30mm from the high tuned to the lower tuned. I guess the variation there on gauge is "out of fashion" now, but I am happy with it.

One of the central questions I have are: Which gives the lognerst ring of the thiker and the thinner strings?

Which gauge makes them ring louder?

And what is a good height to mount them on the bridge for a long versus a loud but shorter ring?

If the understrings go nonlinear during tuning, I think they are either tuned too low or are too thin!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I agree that it's a fundamental question!

I found that very thin strings had less ring, so I've tended to use thicker than standard, but haven't tried anything over .28. I think on this fiddle we had .26 on the top 2 (or maybe 3) and .28 on the lower 2 (or 3). I think I'd be happy to use .30 for everything, but didn't want to get too funky ....

On the newer instruments we have abandoned the low overstring completely because it never seemed to ring audibly - nowadays if I have an instrument with 5 understrings I tune both low ones to D. But I much prefer 4 ...

I would also love to know what people's observations are concerning bridge height - I am torn between the notion that understrings should have as much angle as possible, for volume, but as little angle as possible (for sustain). Generally with new instruments I'm wary about making the understrings too high in case the neck angle drops. Where do you stand on this Anders?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Generally with new instruments I'm wary about making the understrings too high in case the neck angle drops. Where do you stand on this Anders?

I mount them as high as possible. Gives a stronger excitation of them, but they will also probably die out faster. Stiffer fiddles tend to ring longer. I do not have a clear insight into the theory here. A thinner string should get a larger amplitude for the same excitation force, but will drive the bridge with a weaker mass. So maybe the light string will ring longer? But it also probably goes nonlinear at a lower amplitude, due to the lower tension.

Usually the 5th understring is tuned a note up on the G string. If the fiddle is tuned high that 5th understring will lie close to the A0 making it more audible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, that's what I was thinking ... initial volume is probably more important in this musical context than long decay.

I was tuning in D and tuning the 5th understring to B (so same note as you're suggesting), but I just think the wire was too thin (.28) and also it's not a very functional drone note (much easier to hear them a few tones higher). Maybe the stiffness has to increase a bit exponentially as you travel down in pitch?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, that's what I was thinking ... initial volume is probably more important in this musical context than long decay.

I was tuning in D and tuning the 5th understring to B (so same note as you're suggesting), but I just think the wire was too thin (.28) and also it's not a very functional drone note (much easier to hear them a few tones higher). Maybe the stiffness has to increase a bit exponentially as you travel down in pitch?

Do you mean that the A string is tuned to D? That is pretty high! I think you get support from the harmonics of that 5th understring (and the other understrings too). Most noticeable playing on the a and e-string, I think. The first double stop on the a and e strings can get the 5th understring going, quite seldom to hear, but a trait of very good fiddles, I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you mean that the A string is tuned to D? That is pretty high! I think you get support from the harmonics of that 5th understring (and the other understrings too). Most noticeable playing on the a and e-string, I think. The first double stop on the a and e strings can get the 5th understring going, quite seldom to hear, but a trait of very good fiddles, I think.

haha! no sorry I meant that if I tuned the principal strings as with a normal violin (GDAE) (though I normally tune the bottom string up a tone to A) then I would tune the understrings to BDFsharpGA.

With this tuning I could never get the low understring to resonate, but I'm prepared to accept it was a defect of the instrument. I can see that a double stop might create an additional resonance which would set off a low understring, but probably by manipulating the microtuning of the interval - all a bit beyond my technique at the moment!!

Next time around I'll try everything up a tone and get the understrings a bit higher.

Having said that, on the Gyoveland instrument they're really low and they work beautifully ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

haha! no sorry I meant that if I tuned the principal strings as with a normal violin (GDAE) (though I normally tune the bottom string up a tone to A) then I would tune the understrings to BDFsharpGA.

With this tuning I could never get the low understring to resonate, but I'm prepared to accept it was a defect of the instrument. I can see that a double stop might create an additional resonance which would set off a low understring, but probably by manipulating the microtuning of the interval - all a bit beyond my technique at the moment!!

Next time around I'll try everything up a tone and get the understrings a bit higher.

Having said that, on the Gyoveland instrument they're really low and they work beautifully ....

What is your stringlength? As normal for violins?

Low tuning like this might benefit from somewhat thicker strings. At least that is what the west coust players use, thicker strings than typical in Telemark where I come from as they tune lower, say A=A# while Telemark, Hallingdal and Valdres may go from A=B to A=C# in some cases. Thinner strings work better than.

I guess you have some sort of violin playing strings on it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The string length is standard Hardanger - I don't have the instrument we're discussing (it was sold a while ago) but it was made on a traditional model. The 3/4 Thomastik violin strings possibly work better than gut at the lower pitch - many "crossover" players in Scotland are essentially looking for a fiddle with sympathetic strings!

post-34919-0-87858200-1326759688_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 years later...

Coming very late into this conversation: 

I (usually) use geared pegs for the understrings, and regular ebony pegs for the upper strings.   So you can pull the upper string pegs out sidewise when changing a string.

Instead of the Wittner geared pegs, try the "Perfection Pegs".  Before you cut the ends _outside_ the peg box to length, put them on a lathe, grabbing the small end.   Turn the part _inside_ the peg box so it's all uniform diameter.  Otherwise the understring may sit partly on the big diameter and partly on the small diameter.  The Perfection pegs don't have as fine a ratio as the Wittners, but this is partly compensated by the small diameter.

I did some calculations, and saw that (to be emphatic) it's impossible to tune a steel string correctly without a fine tuner.   And extremely impossible ( :)  ) to tune a low tension steel string without a fine tuner.   I think fine tuners in the streng haldar is the way to go.  Here's an early version:

http://dgviolins.com/images/Bridge4.jpg

Dave Golber

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...