Sign in to follow this  
sospiri

String break angle 158 degrees? Where does that come from???

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Violadamore said:

If well-known best practices are used in cutting the bridge and the nut, as well as in attaching the tailpiece, how can the string angle become an issue?  Isn't focusing on the string angle by itself mixing up carts and horses? :huh:

I am trying to focus on the issue for violin makers as well as those who want to set up an already made instrument.

The working methods of the World famous Newark School of violin making were arrived at by studying these problems and arriving at the best compromise without negatively affecting tone, volume, projection and structural integrity. I think all the best makers here follow these measurments and have done for many years.

However, using the Lady Blunt as our model???? Yikes!! no that don't work.  And the real number for the string break angle on that intstrument is more like 155 or 156 degrees or 25 or 24 from horizontal, much more than what we should be doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, sospiri said:

think we should really say 22 degrees (from horizontal) instead of 158.

That is not quite true because 158-162 is the sum of two different angles over the bridge (the fingerboard side and the saddle side) which are different. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 12:43 PM, Michael Darnton said:

Perhaps because you have not stated your case clearly enough to understand?

Tell us, then, what is the right neck angle, in a way that can be used with any violin of any arching height, string length, stop and neck length. If you are saying that you can calculate it as an angle of the top of the board relative to the ribs (Is that where your 7 or 8 degrees comes from? You did not make that clear!), then no, that will not necessarily work equally well with a violin with a 14mm arch and one with a 21mm arch, unless you are changing the overstand as well, and how can you measure this angle when doing a real neck set?

And  then where does the saddle come in on all of this, because it doesn't matter if you follow the arching heigh increase and keep neck angle the same and then don't realize the effect of the saddle height as arching height changes. And in a violin with a twist or worse, a sag in the middle, as many violins do have, where do you measure it (7 or 8 degrees) from, the center where the bridge rests, the length to the saddle? But then what do you do with bridge height if the c-bout is sagging 2mm as many do; make it 2mm higher? That won't work.

Or do you just go for 7 degrees to some arbitrary point and not worry about anything else? If that's your idea, huge mistake!

My point is, some number which does not take ALL the various things going on does not lead to a definite result.

7 degrees is the safe limit for a modern set up I think. But 5 degrees is safer still. And if we consider Don Noon's downforce experiment thread, it makes even more sense to have less of a string break angle than some drawings (which are wrong anyway) suggest. Actual measurements both fore and aft of the bridge of you favourite violins are better than hypothetical drawings.

I don't believe that shallower angles negatively affect tone and projection, but I'm sure they are structurally safer. When I say shallower I mean 160 is better than 155 because it's really better to measure from horizontal to avoid confusion. So 160 is 20 degrees from horizontal and 155 is 25, a very big difference.

Another factor is string tension. How much has it changed in 300 years? And how much difference is there between gut and perlon and steel core?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Riodifirenze said:

That is not quite true because 158-162 is the sum of two different angles over the bridge (the fingerboard side and the saddle side) which are different. 

Yes, very different. But the composite of the two gives the downforce doesn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Riodifirenze said:

A violin with 20 degrees from horizontal...Untitled2.thumb.png.3e513ed73a02ca1bf51d0053f86a432e.png

A bit to much downforce, don't you mean?

I wanna see the thread where you fit the cello bridge to it.  :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A big problem with this is that as you decrease the angle of the neck you increase the overstand, which places a lot more force on the top than the normal string angle over the bridge does on an average fiddle with an average set up. The arch under the fingerboard will be more likely to rise prematurely and the neck will end up dropping too fast and too far because of the increase in the leverage of the neck, because of the high overstand, to accommodate a straighter neck angle to decrease the angle over the bridge to appease some primordal urge of some sort or other because there is a picture of an old fiddle on the internet net with some lines and numbers drawn on it because someone put it there just because they did because they wanted to and it all means nothing,

If there is a fear that a particular fiddle has a weak top, the overstand should be kept as low as is reasonable the saddle should be left highish, and the neck could be set to accommodate a lowish bridge if all of the above was warranted.

The 158 comes from centuries of successful set ups that work,,, and the success rates seems to revolve closely around those numbers, of course things can work fine outside those parameters.

Worrying about the neck angle while ignoring the overstand seems a bit eccentric.

I still don't get what it is you are trying to point out. There are literally trillions of pictures on the internet, I try not to loose sleep over them. You are free to put your own picture out there labeling the correct angles if it pleases you. I haven't figured out yet what you mean,

Shall we all start a petition to get it removed????

Evan  happy little camper and friends!

:):):):):):):):):)

Share this post


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

 

The working methods of the World famous Newark School of violin making were arrived at by studying these problems and arriving at the best compromise without negatively affecting tone, volume, projection and structural integrity.

These basic setup dimension were around long before the Newark School.

3 hours ago, sospiri said:

7 degrees is the safe limit for a modern set up I think. But 5 degrees is safer still. And if we consider Don Noon's downforce experiment thread, it makes even more sense to have less of a string break angle than some drawings (which are wrong anyway) suggest. Actual measurements both fore and aft of the bridge of you favourite violins are better than hypothetical drawings.

I don't believe that shallower angles negatively affect tone and projection,...

I do. The differences between going too high or too low may not be readily apparent to an audience, but they are to a good player. This has largely to do with the envelope in which the instrument can be played.

Granted, it takes a pretty large change in string angle for a noticeable difference if both are played the same way. But the right angle enables a playing style which delivers more power, if the player knows how to use that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Evan Smith said:

A big problem with this is that as you decrease the angle of the neck you increase the overstand, which places a lot more force on the top than the normal string angle over the bridge does on an average fiddle with an average set up. The arch under the fingerboard will be more likely to rise prematurely and the neck will end up dropping too fast and too far because of the increase in the leverage of the neck, because of the high overstand, to accommodate a straighter neck angle to decrease the angle over the bridge to appease some primordal urge of some sort or other because there is a picture of an old fiddle on the internet net with some lines and numbers drawn on it because someone put it there just because they did because they wanted to and it all means nothing,

If there is a fear that a particular fiddle has a weak top, the overstand should be kept as low as is reasonable the saddle should be left highish, and the neck could be set to accommodate a lowish bridge if all of the above was warranted.

The 158 comes from centuries of successful set ups that work,,, and the success rates seems to revolve closely around those numbers, of course things can work fine outside those parameters.

Worrying about the neck angle while ignoring the overstand seems a bit eccentric.

I still don't get what it is you are trying to point out. There are literally trillions of pictures on the internet, I try not to loose sleep over them. You are free to put your own picture out there labeling the correct angles if it pleases you. I haven't figured out yet what you mean,

Shall we all start a petition to get it removed????

Evan  happy little camper and friends!

:):):):):):):):):)

The overstand is a complicated modern thing... I will never ever use it, I love wedged fingerboards! Much easier to adapt to any string angle you want... Simply change the wedge! 

Share this post


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

The overstand is a complicated modern thing... I will never ever use it, I love wedged fingerboards! Much easier to adapt to any string angle you want... Simply change the wedge! 

Unfortunately that won't always work on all violins for a modern player! 

I have done the same illustrations for high arch (ex Willemotte) and the neck would be way too thick, with a wedge.

It's the over-stand that is the key. 

Willemotte has about 3 (+) degrees less steep string angle and that is a lot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Violadamore said:

I wanna see the thread where you fit the cello bridge to it.  :lol:

Im still seeking for a suitable bass bridge... 

 

4 hours ago, sospiri said:

7 degrees is the safe limit for a modern set up I think. But 5 degrees is safer still. And if we consider Don Noon's downforce experiment thread, it makes even more sense to have less of a string break angle than some drawings (which are wrong anyway) suggest. Actual measurements both fore and aft of the bridge of you favourite violins are better than hypothetical drawings.

I don't believe that shallower angles negatively affect tone and projection, but I'm sure they are structurally safer. When I say shallower I mean 160 is better than 155 because it's really better to measure from horizontal to avoid confusion. So 160 is 20 degrees from horizontal and 155 is 25, a very big difference.

Another factor is string tension. How much has it changed in 300 years? And how much difference is there between gut and perlon and steel core?

 

O. K. Jokes aside, 20 degrees is the total string angle over the bridge, which gives us something around 6-8 degrees for the string angle on the neck's side (from horizontal) and 12-14 degrees on the other side(horizontal again) the string angle is only 1-2 degrees more than the angle of the neck. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Riodifirenze said:

The overstand is a complicated modern thing... I will never ever use it, I love wedged fingerboards! Much easier to adapt to any string angle you want... Simply change the wedge! 

The overstand is not by any means a modern thing. The methods of achieving that have gone through various iterations. Open your eyes, and learn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Peter K-G said:

Unfortunately that won't always work on all violins for a modern player! 

I have done the same illustrations for high arch (ex Willemotte) and the neck would be way too thick, with a wedge.

It's the over-stand that is the key. 

Willemotte has about 3 (+) degrees less steep string angle and that is a lot

In that case I would make the neck thinner and trust only the fingerboard to hold the tension, anyway on mi first violin (I can link the thread if you want) I got pretty high arching and it turned out reasonably well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

The overstand is not by any means a modern thing. The methods of achieving that have gone through various iterations. Open your eyes, and learn.

I already said I'm a baroque fanatic! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

The overstand is not by any means a modern thing. The methods of achieving that have gone through various iterations. Open your eyes, and learn.

 

12 minutes ago, Riodifirenze said:

I already said I'm a baroque fanatic! 

What baroque violin setups did not incorporate an overstand? Geez, dude, take your blinders off for a moment or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say DB is right about overstand existing on baroque fiddles - it just doesn't manifest in quite the same way. On a baroque fiddle, neck is placed in such a way that the overstand (usually but not always equal to the thickness of the edge) rises above the plane of the ribs. You can see this on the 1679 Stainer Hargrave wrote about and the one in the NMM, both in essentially original condition. On modern-setup fiddles, the overstand rises above the plane of the edge, instead. So it's a matter of which plane the overstand, er, stands over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the nut on the Lady Blunt was placed so low to help keep some of the leverage factor off of the top?

Maybe the picture is distorted and just plain wrong?

Maybe and I mean JUST Maybe,,,

someone knew what they were doing?

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, JacksonMaberry said:

I'd say DB is right about overstand existing on baroque fiddles - it just doesn't manifest in quite the same way. On a baroque fiddle, neck is placed in such a way that the overstand (usually but not always equal to the thickness of the edge) rises above the plane of the ribs. You can see this on the 1679 Stainer Hargrave wrote about and the one in the NMM, both in essentially original condition. On modern-setup fiddles, the overstand rises above the plane of the edge, instead. So it's a matter of which plane the overstand, er, stands over. 

I always thought that the neck on baroque violins was flush with the upper edge of the belly. At least that is what I heard of and have seen on the last untouched historical examples like the famous Stradivari Medicea tenor viola. 

I think I'm getting confused now!...:blink:

I belive there must be a light thrown on this! 

So let us continue with the never ending interesting discussions on maestronet! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Evan Smith said:

Between Baroque and modern,,,

the physics are the same no matter what you want to call it.

Thats for sure.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Evan Smith said:

Maybe the nut on the Lady Blunt was placed so low to help keep some of the leverage factor off of the top?

Maybe the picture is distorted and just plain wrong?

Maybe and I mean JUST Maybe,,,

someone knew what they were doing?

:)

How kows? 

Share this post


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

I always thought that the neck on baroque violins was flush with the upper edge of the belly. At least that is what I heard of and have seen on the last untouched historical examples like the famous Stradivari Medicea tenor viola. 

 

The added wedge place the strings higher up in the air = overstand, as if it were  closer to a modern neck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

Kows? Ick! Have you tried sheep? ;)

Ah, the swiping on modern smartphones... :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Evan Smith said:

The added wedge place the strings higher up in the air = overstand, as if it were  closer to a modern neck.

I should have said, the neck heel is flush with the edge. 

Yes I assumed that the wedge was counting for the overstand, and... I was not assuming any difference in specs between modern and baroque setup(I mean one must take the same things into consideration, violin, player, etc.) essentially they are the same, overstand or wedge.

Edited by Riodifirenze
Clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.