Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 448
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Haha, well I really couldn't face making a Messie form...there must be thousands. 

So I made a cross breed template and form, length of Messie with girth of Viotti. 

Think I'll name her 'Motti'.  :D 

 

 
 
So you have hybridized form PG with form G.
Me too, one of my preferred and most successful form.
Fortunately, the Cremonese form and method allows a lot of freedom of action, so I'm sure we can avoid making violins too similar...... <_< :)
Posted

Addie,

I have a honey do for you. :wub:

 

Would you please put  both of  the blocks on one side of the Forma P?

Nope. I'm trying to record the forms as accurately as possible. That means the existing corners are in their intended places. Anything else would be an interpretation, which is not my purpose.

But maybe look for a PM in a few days. ;)

Posted

Addie, Just curious. How are you deriving these Forms?  They also appear (from casual observation) to be perfectly symmetrical.  How are you making your choices on which side to duplicate.  I'm asking to learn, and thanks for the drawings, they are great.

 

Cheers,

Jim

Posted

The high quality images were supplied "privately." The side depends on the image. The "P 1705" is the under, or "fondo" side, BTW. They are definitely not symmetrical: see the appropriate files I have posted showing the asymmetry.

Posted

.--- ..- ... - / .... .- ...- .. -. --. / ..-. ..- -. .-.-.- / .. .----. -- / .... .- .--. .--. -.-- / .-- .. - .... / .- -. -.-- - .... .. -. --. / .--. . --- .--. .-.. . / .- .-. . / .- -... .-.. . / - --- / ... .... .- .-. . .-.-.-

 

Just having fun.  I'm happy with anything people are able to share.

Posted

I'm currently able to share the SL 1691.  Please note the lower bout width.  With the other measurements from the English ed. of Sacconi, only 194mm worked for the lower bouts, not the 195.5.  194mm is the width published in the Italian edition.  The Radii are my direct measurements. 

 

Also noteworthy: if you simply scaled the G on the horizontal axis, you would not get the SL.  The curves of the upper and lower bouts are tighter (rounder), and the block corners further out (wider) on the SL, compared with a squashed G.

post-35343-0-17160800-1453233464_thumb.jpg

post-35343-0-72140400-1453233475_thumb.jpg

Forma SL 1691 Legal.pdf

Forma SL 1691 A4-1.pdf

Forma SL 1691 A4-2.pdf

Forma SL Aymmetry.pdf

Posted

Addie,

 

This is fantastic work, many, many thanks!

I have downloaded all your recent drawings, they are superb.

 

Peter

Never mind that... which one should I do next?  :lol:

Posted

 

 

Because of the Musée de la Musique cello form, it's going to be a LARGE format book.  :lol:

And would You share with us Your drawings of these forms? :wub:   (I think that there are forms of small violoncello, some viola da gamba, cornerless violin, viola d´amore and guitar)

Posted

I'm currently able to share the SL 1691.  Please note the lower bout width.  With the other measurements from the English ed. of Sacconi, only 194mm worked for the lower bouts, not the 195.5.  194mm is the width published in the Italian edition.  The Radii are my direct measurements. 

 

Also noteworthy: if you simply scaled the G on the horizontal axis, you would not get the SL.  The curves of the upper and lower bouts are tighter (rounder), and the block corners further out (wider) on the SL, compared with a squashed G.

 

Where did you get the measurements for the form SL?

Those that I have are different.

 

Pollens :   348   - 154   -  99    - 193

Denis   :   349.2 - 154.4 - 99.2 - 193.5

Sacconi :  350   -  153   -  100  - 194    (italian edition)

Posted

The English edition of Sacconi has, page 195, 350mm, 195.5mm, 154.5mm, 100mm.

Using 350mm and 100mm, I got UB 154.5, but LB 194 from the image I am using.

Which set of measurements do you prefer? If Pollens or Denis, can you PM me the full set of measurements for all forms?

Posted

The English edition of Sacconi has, page 195, 350mm, 195.5mm, 154.5mm, 100mm.

Using 350mm and 100mm, I got UB 154.5, but LB 194 from the image I am using.

Which set of measurements do you prefer? If Pollens or Denis, can you PM me the full set of measurements for all forms?

 

It seems that the various editions of the Sacconi do it on purpose to change the numbers to create havoc, as if were not enough the inaccuracies of the original <_<

 

However, I think that the dimensions of your drawing are fine : with four sets of different measures, I would not know which one to choose, without going back to measure the original form....... :rolleyes:

 

Don't you have books of Pollens and Denis?

Posted

 

Don't you have books of Pollens and Denis?

No, the Accademia is a budget operation.  Our door-to-door shortbread sellers were recently arrested for impersonating Guides.  So the budget is close to £0.00

post-35343-0-93984300-1453313043_thumb.jpg

Posted

No, the Accademia is a budget operation.  Our door-to-door shortbread sellers were recently arrested for impersonating Guides.  So the budget is close to £0.00

 

I will send you a PM as soon as possible, to give in great secrecy my support to the Accademia :ph34r: :ph34r: 

Posted

Addie, Thanks for the drawings.  I made my P form based on Denis' geometry.  The corners were a real head scratcher for me.  What I settled on, based on your drawings, falls between the P and G form corners.  I'm ok with that, and I feel better about it after comparing to your drawings.  Now if only my blocks were a good match to my template. :unsure:  

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...