Attention to detail and stifled creativity?

[Conor Russell]

8 hours ago, johnms said:

In reply to Connors question

I'm not sure what you mean by first and third generation asymmetry. Can you explain?

Sorry, I should have realized that this statement would not make sense.

In  the very first known violins the sound post is positioned on the centerline.  

By Amati the post had moved off the centre line to todays modern position, and for me this was the first of 3 major design changes aimed at modifying the sound.   All three changes were a deliberate move away from symmetry.

In my definition for asymmetry it is not the widely adopted visual appearance aspect that I was referring to.   Rather it is the fundamental design concept changes that were introduced to modify the sound output of the instrument that is my determinant for asymmetry,  

Whether or not these design modifications produced better sounding violins may be a moot point, but the asymmetric design in the later Cremonese era does set a standard.   The fact that the underlying design asymmetry is not appreciated does not mean it is not there. The resultant visual aspects that can be readily observed are generally dismissed  as being not intended. 

I misunderstood.

I suppose I don't see the violin's ancestors as violins at all. The function of the post and bar seem to me to so essential to the violin, that one with a different arrangement would be classed as a different instrument.

 

[Conor Russell]

8 hours ago, johnms said:

In reply to Connors question

I'm not sure what you mean by first and third generation asymmetry. Can you explain?

Sorry, I should have realized that this statement would not make sense.

In  the very first known violins the sound post is positioned on the centerline.  

By Amati the post had moved off the centre line to todays modern position, and for me this was the first of 3 major design changes aimed at modifying the sound.   All three changes were a deliberate move away from symmetry.

In my definition for asymmetry it is not the widely adopted visual appearance aspect that I was referring to.   Rather it is the fundamental design concept changes that were introduced to modify the sound output of the instrument that is my determinant for asymmetry,  

Whether or not these design modifications produced better sounding violins may be a moot point, but the asymmetric design in the later Cremonese era does set a standard.   The fact that the underlying design asymmetry is not appreciated does not mean it is not there. The resultant visual aspects that can be readily observed are generally dismissed  as being not intended. 

I misunderstood.

I suppose I don't see the violin's ancestors as violins at all. The function of the post and bar seem to me to so essential to the violin, that one with a different arrangement would be classed as a different instrument.

 

[Conor Russell]

8 hours ago, johnms said:

In reply to Connors question

I'm not sure what you mean by first and third generation asymmetry. Can you explain?

Sorry, I should have realized that this statement would not make sense.

In  the very first known violins the sound post is positioned on the centerline.  

By Amati the post had moved off the centre line to todays modern position, and for me this was the first of 3 major design changes aimed at modifying the sound.   All three changes were a deliberate move away from symmetry.

In my definition for asymmetry it is not the widely adopted visual appearance aspect that I was referring to.   Rather it is the fundamental design concept changes that were introduced to modify the sound output of the instrument that is my determinant for asymmetry,  

Whether or not these design modifications produced better sounding violins may be a moot point, but the asymmetric design in the later Cremonese era does set a standard.   The fact that the underlying design asymmetry is not appreciated does not mean it is not there. The resultant visual aspects that can be readily observed are generally dismissed  as being not intended. 

I misunderstood.

I suppose I don't see the violin's ancestors as violins at all. The function of the post and bar seem to me to so essential to the violin, that one with a different arrangement would be classed as a different instrument.

 

[Violadamore]

24 minutes ago, Conor Russell said:

I misunderstood.

I suppose I don't see the violin's ancestors as violins at all. The function of the post and bar seem to me to so essential to the violin, that one with a different arrangement would be classed as a different instrument.

 

Which brings us hard up against one of the limits to applying carefree Dadaist-style "creativity" to what we are doing. 

[Conor Russell]

I seem to have posted three times!

[Julian Cossmann Cooke]

1 hour ago, Violadamore said:

Which brings us hard up against one of the limits to applying carefree Dadaist-style "creativity" to what we are doing. 

That's what I say every time I finish an instrument:  Da-DA!

[gowan]

On 3/4/2018 at 11:29 AM, Jim Bress said:

I like the idea.  It brings to mind the Oberlin viola project where all the makers were provided the same form then left to make as they saw fit.  I'm sure there where more parameters but I don't recall them (and I wasn't involved).  The train wreck of these two thoughts colliding brings the following idea to mind (as if someone would make competition rules based on my idea).

1.  All entries are provided a form drawing to scale.

2.  When entering you choose whether you will be making a copy or a free style model based on the form.

3.  If entering a copy you will be given the specs needed or a way of accessing the information needed to make a copy of that instrument.

4.  Judging will be based on the category you entered, copy or free style.

I actually like Nathan's idea as better competition.  My idea was just an attempt to make the competition less of a time commitment for makers. 

There was a contest several years ago in Bergen, Norway, in celebration of, I think, some anniversary of the great violinist Ole Bull.  Contestants were to submit instruments that were either copies of or inspired by the GdG Ole Bull instrument.  There was some discussion of this on these boards.  If I recall, the idiosyncrasy of the Guarneri "Ole Bull" violin was a challenge to the contestants.