wood selection

[Emilg]

On 2/16/2019 at 2:57 PM, Michael_Molnar said:

So, I guess European spruce dealers are selling me picked-over wood.

Yes, but you can ask for low density i presume.

I once asked about the density of the spruce tops and they replied 12%.. i did not bother to ask any further but did buy 2 complete sets. The maple was lovely but the spruce turned out 0.44.. next time i will know what 12% really means 

[Michael Szyper]

Question to the guys that used Engelmann: Did you notice a difference in sound between Engelmann and Alpine spruce? 

[Don Noon]

14 minutes ago, Michael Szyper said:

Question to the guys that used Engelmann: Did you notice a difference in sound between Engelmann and Alpine spruce? 

I notice a difference in sound in every instrument I've made, and Engelmann tends to be lower density,  so there are a lot of problems making comparisons...  but for similar densities, I haven't noticed any apparent difference (sample size of  1 or 2 comparable sets).

[Okawbow]

I've only made a few over a dozen violins. About half were with European wood, and half with Englemann spruce. My Englemann tops seem slightly louder under my ear. When others play the instruments, I think the Englemann sounds at least as good as the European spruce. 

[nathan slobodkin]

There is not necessarily a difference in sound between different types of wood but there are definitely differences in how you work them. As some one already pointed out there is such a variability in all varieties of spruce that adjustments must be made for each piece whether you are using the same species or several.

[edi malinaric]

15 hours ago, Emilg said:

 - snip -

I once asked about the density of the spruce tops and they replied 12%.. i did not bother to ask any further but did buy 2 complete sets. The maple was lovely but the spruce turned out 0.44.. next time i will know what 12% really means 

Hi Emilg - sounds as though while you asked about "density", he heard "moisture content".

cheers edi

[Emilg]

1 hour ago, edi malinaric said:

Hi Emilg - sounds as though while you asked about "density", he heard "moisture content".

cheers edi

Hi Edi, yes that was my assumption too.. but any wood dealer would know the difference wouldn't he.  I think he tried to avoid to mention that 0.44...

[edi malinaric]

2 hours ago, Emilg said:

Hi Edi, yes that was my assumption too.. but any wood dealer would know the difference wouldn't he.  I think he tried to avoid to mention that 0.44...

Hi Emilg - my parents were Croatian and in 1935 Grandfather and Father (and Mother) came to South Africa to earn more than they could in Europe. I was born in July 1939 and they had tickets booked to return home in Sept of that year.

Dad had served in the Austro-Hungarian cavalry in 1918 and when that good-for-nothing Austrian Corporal heard that Dad was on his way home he got so upset he started WW2 - that meant that we became "trapped" here.

Anyway every few years I manage to get myself over to Croatia and make contact with the family. I often wonder how much we are talking past each other. Once about 20 years ago, I apologised to my one cousin for my poor command of the language and his reply floored me for a bit. "No, it's not that - you speak with absolutely no foreign accent at all. If I didn't know that you were our age I would think that you were from the village and were about 90 years old". We batted this backward and forward a bit and established that as I had learnt the language from my Father, I was speaking the village dialect from the turn of the last century, using some words that no longer existed in the vocabulary.

OK, that's when the two people's home language are different.

However even when both parties are native speakers problems still occur. In preparation for an exam, how often has it been stressed that before answering a question, one must read the question 2 or 3 times and to make sure that you understand it before putting pen to paper? And still we go wandering down the wrong path.

WRT humidity/SG the only clue is that humidity is expressed as a percentage while Specific Gravity is dimensionless.

cheers edi

 

[Emilg]

11 minutes ago, edi malinaric said:

Hi Emilg - my parents were Croatian and in 1935 Grandfather and Father (and Mother) came to South Africa to earn more than they could in Europe. I was born in July 1939 and they had tickets booked to return home in Sept of that year.

Dad had served in the Austro-Hungarian cavalry in 1918 and when that good-for-nothing Austrian Corporal heard that Dad was on his way home he got so upset he started WW2 - that meant that we became "trapped" here.

Anyway every few years I manage to get myself over to Croatia and make contact with the family. I often wonder how much we are talking past each other. Once about 20 years ago, I apologised to my one cousin for my poor command of the language and his reply floored me for a bit. "No, it's not that - you speak with absolutely no foreign accent at all. If I didn't know that you were our age I would think that you were from the village and were about 90 years old". We batted this backward and forward a bit and established that as I had learnt the language from my Father, I was speaking the village dialect from the turn of the last century, using some words that no longer existed in the vocabulary.

OK, that's when the two people's home language are different.

However even when both parties are native speakers problems still occur. In preparation for an exam, how often has it been stressed that before answering a question, one must read the question 2 or 3 times and to make sure that you understand it before putting pen to paper? And still we go wandering down the wrong path.

WRT humidity/SG the only clue is that humidity is expressed as a percentage while Specific Gravity is dimensionless.

cheers edi

 

Hi Edi, great story! .. and you are right not to judge too quick when it come to understanding words by people from different backgrounds or cultures. Btw, many moons ago i spent 2 days in Capetown, when we were immigrating to Australia, but that's another story...

Anyway, the 2 sets costed only 250 euro total (incl shipping) for tops / nice flamed backs / necks / block for ribs. So i regard the tops as sortof extra, maybe i can do some experiment with them (baking, fungi, soaking in salt water). Oh and the wood came from Transsylvania, which adds a nice touch doesnt it..

[Michael Szyper]

Thanks for the input @Don Noon and @Okawbow.

It is clear that a  comparison between to  wood species regarding a violins sound is more than difficult.

It would be necessary  to make at least pairs: Matching violin construction (only achievable by cnc?) with comparable density, stiffnesses across and along the grain. Then I'm curous how much of these pairs  one would need to achieve significant results.

So as often in violin making, eminence is a bit easier to achieve than evidence but not quite as precise.

In my experience all those  numbers (RR, density, damping) are often overestimated. 

Making the plates "work together" (whatever that means) seems to be a lot more important than differences of 10-15 % in the RR.

[Emilg]

55 minutes ago, Michael Szyper said:

Thanks for the input @Don Noon and @Okawbow.

It is clear that a  comparison between to  wood species regarding a violins sound is more than difficult.

It would be necessary  to make at least pairs: Matching violin construction (only achievable by cnc?) with comparable density, stiffnesses across and along the grain. Then I'm curous how much of these pairs  one would need to achieve significant results.

So as often in violin making, eminence is a bit easier to achieve than evidence but not quite as precise.

In my experience all those  numbers (RR, density, damping) are often overestimated. 

Making the plates "work together" (whatever that means) seems to be a lot more important than differences of 10-15 % in the RR.

Hi Michael, there's not much info on that subject, but i found the post by Michael Darnton (from june 2000) i mentioned earlier:

Quote

The different top woods I've tried have all had different characters or personalities. The wood with the most interesting sound that I've tried is European spruce. I've found Englemann (a wood commonly used by American makers) to be distinctly more boring in sound than European, and so far red spruce is just coming out differently--I'm not sure if it's good or bad--it might just need to be treated differently. Cedar was a total loss--really nasty sounding, except for small violins. This shouldn't have surprised me, since there were several makers in the last century who sometimes used cedar, and it didn't work for them, either. This isn't too surprising--though these woods all look similar, they feel quite different under the gouge.

I cannot confirm nor deny this because i only made 5 with European, and they sound very different anyway. But when people like Michael, Don, David, Marty, Roger, etc, etc. speak, i listen

[Marty Kasprzyk]

A violin making friend of mine (now deceased) gave me a piece of very old red cedar which I used to make a new top for one of my violin teacher's damaged ancestor's instruments.  The wood was very crumbly and difficult to cut and scrape cleanly.

He thought it sounded wonderful and I was proud that he chose it to use in his very last concert before he died.

I know it is wise not to jump to conclusions based upon just one data point but using cedar frightens me.

[Ken_N]

I got some cedar form an old barn a guy at work tore down.  100+ years old.  It worked good for a child sized guitar, and I only have enough to do some other small flat top instrument.  The boards were just too narrow and thin.

I've used Sitka at .4 - .45 and bear claw.  I like the bear claw. 

I've used Engleman at .3 - .38. The stuff I have now is .37, haven't used that yet. It's lighter,  I didn't have another sitting around at the same to to compare.

I used Red Spruce once, and it wanted to split all the time; after it was all done! Threw it away.

I have Port Orford Cedar at .45  that seems resonant.  Yellow Cedar that seems resonant, and some old curly Redwood for the arch top that is very resonant.   None are really cedars.  They will all probably work.  They won't be the same, but ... so?  Does everything always have to be the same.

Yeah I know I'm nuts.

 

[jezzupe]

I consider the material a very big part of the picture. It has come to be my observation that if one{most} want the "Cremona" sound, that assuming they have the capabilities to create a functioning instrument , that European Spruce within the "proper" parameters is most likely to yield that particular "shade" of sound.

When at all possible, I always try to handle material before purchase, not big on having stuff sent to me, however I've always made it work.

In certain circumstances getting stuff site unseen is a no brainier if it is coming from a qualified luthier as in the case when I got some spantastik wood from Joe's friend and luthier Danielle Hoffman , old ponded Sitka that was the most "Euro" feeling Sitka ever....but

When I was young, the Christmas time tv special "Rudolph the Red nosed reindeer" had the scene with the "land of misfit toys" with the friendly Lion King. Perhaps it was because of my circumstances and that I identified with being a "misfit", but I really loved the lion and thought to myself someday I might become the lion king where I would make a place where all the misfits could go so they would feel loved too.

And even if the toys were really all inanimate objects, in the right environment, inanimate objects come to life as seen on the island or on stage or the recording studio. 

And well, I'm not sure how it started, but somehow I started to look at all the wood around me like the land of misfit toys...

Thinking, " wow look at that 2x10 redwood board, spec'ed for building, that's a shame it's going to get slapped up on someones deck where it will serve it's purpose, when in fact, that  board is just dying to sing,to be showcased, spotlighted, to be eagerly put to work in the studio!"

all these misfit boards purposed for some other mundane life just waiting to be found by me, the lion king!

So, I spend lots of time looking at that old door over there, or that 2x4 over there, that dead tree over there, wow look at that fence they're tearing down, lots of "reclaimed wood and or wood made for some other purpose.

that to me is a big part of the "thrill", to make Shinola out of chit" to use material that others would not even think of using, because it did not come from a "tonewood" dealer.

I can proudly say that a chunk of Fir and some chunks of Redwood purchased at an ACE hardware distributor are sitting where they belong , in award winning musicians studios, being used and most importantly being loved,

Because wood does not break the laws of physics, but it does have feelings and self awareness if you can make it have a soul. 

[gowan]

On 2/14/2019 at 2:05 PM, H.R.Fisher said:

  Am I understanding this statement correctly? Are you suggesting that to build a violin with an award winning tone it can only be accomplished with top quality tone wood? This is really the question at the core of my original post. 

There are always exceptions.  Storioni made great violins with wood that almost any maker today would reject.  There is a Stradivari violin, 1670 the "Tullaye", that has big knots on the center join of the back.  Of course that violin was built very early in Stradivari's career and then he might not have had access to good wood.

[francesco piasentini]

I like light wood (350-380 kg/m3 for Spruce and 580-620 for maple).

It is not so difficult to find 360 kg/m3 in Fiemme valley (Ciresa and Paneveggio forestry guardians) or Latemar.

Of course it helps a lot if you go by your own with a suitable scale and tape meter (or a couple if you are shopping cello wood).

People are happy when you buy, and let you stay for a whole day moving wood blanks.

 

[HoGo]

I believe todays "standards" for tonewood are too much based upon few factors, tight, even grain, even color being the top after that perhaps density but there are makers who prefer low while others prefer average.... We can see that old masters used quite a few pieces that a reputable dealer wouldn't let into his firewood pile. In my experience unless the wood is really bad (knotty, twist, mechanical defects) it can be worked into succesful instrument. If you limit yourself to pretty tight definition of wood quality to use (let's say you prefer some SG and variety of wood) you can get more consistent results more easily but that doesn't mean the rest of the wood is any worse. Someone else can get even better results with that if he concentrates on that kind of wood.

I'm there with Jessupe. I'm looking at each piece of wood around me as potential source material for my work and my current spruce wood I'm using for tops came from split logs for firewood. Not even old growth but nice straight split and very few knots. So far it made four musicians very happy and next instruments soon to be finished.

I just split to sections of large old growth log of spruce in january I found at local "log" dealer, it was destined for firewood as it had some rot in the center but being 80cm diameter and approx 300 years old and no twist at all, I got 50 or so beautiful top wedges (some mandola/viola one-piecers) and lots of bracewood almost for free. I've got beautiful plum wood  from our fruit garden and many odd species even some exotic pieces like  Syringa vulgaris from rather large example. Perhaps it will be good for fittings.

[martin swan]

2 hours ago, gowan said:

There are always exceptions.  Storioni made great violins with wood that almost any maker today would reject.  There is a Stradivari violin, 1670 the "Tullaye", that has big knots on the center join of the back.  Of course that violin was built very early in Stradivari's career and then he might not have had access to good wood.

"Top quality tone wood" is really not the same thing as tonewood graded highly by today's tonewood dealers and makers! All sorts of wood is rejected now which made superb violins for early makers.

It's the same with bows - look at a Peccatte school bow, you will find wind shakes, thunder shakes, mineral streaks, cross grain, original pieces stuck on to cover pin knots, all kinds of "wood defects".

[Don Noon]

25 minutes ago, martin swan said:

"Top quality tone wood" is really not the same thing as tonewood graded highly by today's tonewood dealers and makers! All sorts of wood is rejected now which made superb violins for early makers.

If you have any clue what the real factors are in deciding what "top quality tonewood" are, this would be a nice time to let us know .   I am presuming that visual defects are not actually tone enhancers.

[martin swan]

9 hours ago, Don Noon said:

If you have any clue what the real factors are in deciding what "top quality tonewood" are, this would be a nice time to let us know .   I am presuming that visual defects are not actually tone enhancers.

I was being slightly rhetorical ...

But I suppose "top quality tonewood" is wood that you know how to work in order to get a great sound.

It's clear from makers like Storioni or the Prague school that very broad grain can make an excellent violin - similarly wood with far from straight grain. 

[sospiri]

11 hours ago, Don Noon said:

If you have any clue what the real factors are in deciding what "top quality tonewood" are, this would be a nice time to let us know .   

Oh that's easy. Top quality tonewood is what ends up in the hands of a master luthier and then a master player.

[kevin Prestwich]

I asked a famous maker and teacher this exact question and his response was that the top was responsible for at least 70% of the tonal output of a violin (Personally, I put that number higher than 70%).Top wood is one of the cheapest things to buy when building a violin, around the same price as a set of good strings. That being the case, why not get the very best wood that you can find, based on whatever criteria you may have? 

[Wee B. Bridges]

32 minutes ago, kevin Prestwich said:

I asked a famous maker and teacher this exact question and his response was that the top was responsible for at least 70% of the tonal output of a violin (Personally, I put that number higher than 70%).Top wood is one of the cheapest things to buy when building a violin, around the same price as a set of good strings. That being the case, why not get the very best wood that you can find, based on whatever criteria you may have? 

 

Its taken 3 pages for someone to post a percentage.

I was a little dubious to jump in, however I have always consider the top wood at 75%. One reason we spend our life collecting tone wood—the holy grail of violin making. 

 

[Emilg]

6 hours ago, Wee B. Bridges said:

 

Its taken 3 pages for someone to post a percentage.

I was a little dubious to jump in, however I have always consider the top wood at 75%. One reason we spend our life collecting tone wood—the holy grail of violin making. 

 

I'm also thinking 70-80%, but that is for a finished top, varnishes and setup.. not just the spruce selection. But it will be impossible to substanciate that number.  I changed the top on a violin once which completely changed the character.

[martin swan]

But the top is not just wood, it's also arching, graduations, breadth, length and f-hole design.

What percentage of the 70% is the wood? It seems blindingly obvious that very poor violins are made with very fine wood, and vice versa.