Sign in to follow this  
Nick Allen

Nick Allen's Bench.

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Ken_N said:

I've made them 18-19 with light wood.  But people are so used to 15 they gasp, like it came down from Outer space.

I want to make a Peter of Mantua with a 20mm arch in baroque setup soon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nick Allen said:

Yup. David mentioned that, so I take that word as very solid.

 Makes sense. I recall a thread on MN where someone was trying to quantify density with arching and thickness compensations. Of course it was met with the usual "just do it with instinct and artistry" and some more inquisitive/calculating responses. Should look that up again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Nick Allen said:

I want to make a Peter of Mantua with a 20mm arch in baroque setup soon. 

If you can look at Andres Cardenes' Petrus of Mantua violin someday at CMU you can see that style of arching. The varnish on his instrument is incredible! I glued an open seam way back in the day...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/24/2019 at 2:34 PM, scordatura said:

If you can look at Andres Cardenes' Petrus of Mantua violin someday at CMU you can see that style of arching. The varnish on his instrument is incredible! I glued an open seam way back in the day...

Elizabeth Blumenstock's Andrea Guarneri displays this sort of arching as well (perhaps unsurprisingly). Though she is a Baroque specialist, it retains the "modern" neck it picked up sometime in the 19th century - the arch damn near grazes the underside of the fingerboard, even with a reasonable overstand and neck pitch. 

I have never gone as high as 20, only as high as 18mm, but it got me where I wanted to go with that billet of spruce. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JacksonMaberry said:

Elizabeth Blumenstock's Andrea Guarneri displays this sort of arching as well (perhaps unsurprisingly). Though she is a Baroque specialist, it retains the "modern" neck it picked up sometime in the 19th century - the arch damn near grazes the underside of the fingerboard, even with a reasonable overstand and neck pitch. 

I have never gone as high as 20, only as high as 18mm, but it got me where I wanted to go with that billet of spruce. 

The violin professor at Oberlin plays an A. Guarneri with this kind of obscene arching. It sounds unlike anything I've ever heard. Next level stuff. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nick Allen said:

The violin professor at Oberlin plays an A. Guarneri with this kind of obscene arching. It sounds unlike anything I've ever heard. Next level stuff. 

Something special about the direct Amati lineage, man. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never tried the f hole cutters...I prefer to drill a small diameter hole and then enlarge with chain saw files and then use a knife to finish. Some f holes don't have perfect circles too. Great looking plate Nick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like these cutters. I experimented with Brad's and they have the small tendency to rip fibers from the upper most layer sometimes. You kind of have to run the bit backwards for a few turns first I found. But that could be due to dull bits. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/24/2019 at 5:34 PM, scordatura said:

If you can look at Andres Cardenes' Petrus of Mantua violin someday at CMU you can see that style of arching. The varnish on his instrument is incredible! I glued an open seam way back in the day...

Yes, I've often wondered if anyone made a copy of his instrument, the arching is dramatic.  And I was also surprised how nice the varnish looked, even though there was just one small patch of red-orange left on the back, and mostly yellow remaining.  It made one think that a lot of the color had worn off over time...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Three13 said:

Will you go with the standard 130-mm neck or maintain a 2 to 3 ratio?

I'll have to mull over on that one. 

But wouldn't a 2-3 be somewhere in between, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I'll deviate from the 130 neck on my builds, to keep to the standard.  And the bridge position can be fudged slightly from the notches to get you 195, that would be one approach.  Others here on MN have made that suggestion before.

Unless you have a real reason you wanted the bridge at 197.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, violinsRus said:

I don't think I'll deviate from the 130 neck on my builds, to keep to the standard.  And the bridge position can be fudged slightly from the notches to get you 195, that would be one approach.  Others here on MN have made that suggestion before.

Unless you have a real reason you wanted the bridge at 197.  

Imho you have two concurring standards. The number 130 vs the 2:3 ratio. Players don’t feel numbers, but they may notice ratios being off, for example a too short neck. For a good player it is a matter of seconds to adapt to a 2 mm longer stop. 
Michael Darnton once wrote here that players would accept different string lengths and too long necks, but not too short necks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/29/2019 at 3:01 AM, Michael Szyper said:

Imho you have two concurring standards. The number 130 vs the 2:3 ratio. Players don’t feel numbers, but they may notice ratios being off, for example a too short neck. For a good player it is a matter of seconds to adapt to a 2 mm longer stop. 
Michael Darnton once wrote here that players would accept different string lengths and too long necks, but not too short necks.

You're right about that. Not that I know that myself, but I trust both you and MD. 

I think my next violin will be on a smaller DG form. Something closer to a 353mm back. I have the feeling that this violin will also lack some concentration, due to the larger lower bouts, long string length and weird wood. But I'm hoping for the best. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here I've followed MD's advice again and made an 11mm bass bar and a transformed triangle bass bar profile, with the high point in the middle. 

Also time to close this boi up! 

15800955509918445264324109524604.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Nick Allen said:

I think my next violin will be on a smaller DG form. Something closer to a 353mm back. I have the feeling that this violin will also lack some concentration, due to the larger lower bouts, long string length and weird wood. But I'm hoping for the best. 

You can make what you want but do keep in mind some of these newly completed violins do take a few years to come around.

Is there a narrower Strad design widthwise to use without being too small?

Share this post


Link to post
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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.