Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Rib Taper hypothesis #43,759


sospiri
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Bill Merkel said:

Your best bet would be to look for what they have in common, rather than make them have in common what you want them to have

Exactly!  That is how I found what I found.  By looking to what or if there was something there to find and see, and if it worked broadly against the whole body of classicsl Cremona evidence.

That's what I did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 452
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It's not a theory about nature or mathematics.

The hypothesis asserts that you can observe certain parterns of geometry and proportion use that are broadly consistent across the example works of the main Cremona makers from A Amati through Bergonzi and Del Gesu.

It asserts that these patterns represent a tradition of work and allows us to guess at paterns of working that can produce these results and that might actually be how they work, or might just be similar or parallel in results.

The hypothesis does not assure that they weren't human beings.  Maybe on occasion someone stepped outside those traditions and the paterns for expanding and varying results that we can already observe.

They are people. They can err. They can rebel.  If examples like that exist, I haven't seen them yet.  And odd instrument that do exist like the Chardon or Strad's Pochette seem to show just how far they went to meet unusual needs through variations of the common traditions that are as simple and direct as possible, or that bring back something that had been used in older instrument types like the Braccios.

 

So, no.  We are not talking about set theory axioms.  One counter example would be very interesting.  But there would be little harm in acknowledging that an odd case was an odd case.

 

So, that said, do you have an interesting odd case in mind?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, David Beard said:

It's not a theory about nature or mathematics.

The hypothesis asserts that you can observe certain parterns of geometry and proportion use that are broadly consistent across the example works of the main Cremona makers from A Amati through Bergonzi and Del Gesu.

Broadly consistent might be useful, but it isn't good enough to characterize something, which is what I think you're trying to do. I think you're trying to say this is what is behind what you see, but for that to be true it has to be supported by every example.  As far as I know personally it might be supported by every example, but lots of people seem to be saying in various ways that it isn't,  That's the core issue, that makes this eleven pages so far

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're suggesting that there might be a single counter example out there, but your not sure.  And that somehow such a possibility negates the whole thing.  That's absurd.

And then you're saying that some people resisting what challenges the status quo and is new to them somehow demonstrates that they know of counter examples but even though they aren't bringing them forward. Again, absurd.

Even if these principle old held in 90% of examples, it would be very interesting an powerful.   In a cooking tradition for example, run continously in a town for two centuries, a 90% comformance to the tradition might be extraordinary.

But in the old Cremona violin making tradition, the principles we can observe seem to hold much more than 90% of the time.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, David Beard said:

You're suggesting that there might be a single counter example out there, but your not sure.  And that somehow such a possibility negates the whole thing.  That's absurd.

My not knowing if there's a single counterexample may be absurd but it's irrelevant to my argument because the thing is many experts seem to be telling you in various ways there are counterexamples.  And yes, a single counterexample would negate a theory of "here's what's behind it all", no matter how superficially interesting the theory was.  You have to be a little bit scientific... At least that much.   If you were really making claims only about things a few of them have in common, you would not be demanding counterexamples now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David, no one has to find a counter example when by adding odd fractions to every neck length, and fudging the other concepts you present in a similar way you are making every single example a case that doesn't fit your "consistent" plan. You need to find concepts that actually work, rather than constantly using "work in the margins" as a bad excuse to patch up bad theories

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you set up a radar detector in my little town you would probably find a bell curve distribution of vehicle speeds which has little relation with our 30mph speed limit law.  Hence the idea "Laws are made to be broken" so that speed limit traffic fines can pay for our police.

Likewise for violin "laws": They're followed somewhat but If you deviate too much the violin police fine you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bill Merkel said:

You get fined, but violin laws aren't as arbitrary as speed limits?  I remember reading somewhere a long time ago that the odder a violin looks, the less it sounds like a violin?  The goal is to make it sound like a violin, worse yet a good violin :)

 

People don't agree on what the color of sound a good violin should be just as they don't agree on what what is the only good color or shape for cars.  So I don't see this concern for proportions to be an important issue.

However playability things like bridge and fingerboard curvatures, string spacings and heights etc. do see close agreement.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Michael Darnton said:

David, no one has to find a counter example when by adding odd fractions to every neck length, and fudging the other concepts you present in a similar way you are making every single example a case that doesn't fit your "consistent" plan. You need to find concepts that actually work, rather than constantly using "work in the margins" as a bad excuse to patch up bad theories

This is your failing,  not mine.

Why do you get to say what choices they are allowed.

Now that I have shown a way that does work with the evidence, I think it's up to those opposed to present either examples that don't work, or a more solid alternative that does.

You're not liking how they made choices doesn't matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Bill Merkel said:

My not knowing if there's a single counterexample may be absurd but it's irrelevant to my argument because the thing is many experts seem to be telling you in various ways there are counterexamples.  And yes, a single counterexample would negate a theory of "here's what's behind it all", no matter how superficially interesting the theory was.  You have to be a little bit scientific... At least that much.   If you were really making claims only about things a few of them have in common, you would not be demanding counterexamples now!

Bill, if I am one of these supposed experts, I am not claiming that David Beard's method won't work. Only that it's unnecessarily complex and time consuming, while lacking in evidence of superior outcomes.

46 minutes ago, David Beard said:

This is your failing,  not mine.

Why do you get to say what choices they are allowed.

While the above question/comment was not directed at me, I will still ask:

Why do you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not.  I'm observing and reporting which patterns fit the evidence most completely and broadly.

Believe me, I would prefer not finding a system with 'liberty at the margins' as a significant aspect.   It's a difficult conversation to have with a resistive audience.  But the anti hypothesis that there is no 'liberty at the margins' fails against the evidence.

I am reporting neutral observations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 "But the anti hypothesis that there is no 'liberty at the margins' fails against the evidence."

I see quite the opposite. The evidence is fine and consistent, but you aren't seeing that because you are too tied to your own ideas, which *require* a fudge factor because they are simply wrong. You're doing the equivalent of working on a European car with American wrenches and declaring that the Europeans aren't very precise in their bolt dimensions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, David Burgess said:

Bill, if I am one of these supposed experts, I am not claiming that David Beard's method won't work. Only that it's unnecessarily complex and time consuming, while lacking in evidence of superior outcomes.

Judging from that, I may have misread what he's trying to do.  I thought he was giving us a Cremonese secret, but you seem to think it's just trying for a method that gives good results.  You have read more of it than me, no doubt :)  It would be good to see a concise statement of purpose and followable and practical procedure before five o'clock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Bill Merkel said:

Judging from that, I may have misread what he's trying to do.  I thought he was giving us a Cremonese secret, but you seem to think it's just trying for a method that gives good results.

I do tend to be a results-oriented guy, with a predilection to evaluate things from that perspective. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Bill Merkel said:

And I tend to be a does it mesh with what we know about the universe-oriented guy, so yeah

Didn't we have a guy here a while back who insisted that the vibrational frequency of the universe was either 430 or 435 HZ (I don't remember which), so that was the only "correct" tuning for a violin A ? :)

Link to comment
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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...