Rib Taper hypothesis #43,759


Recommended Posts

Just now, David Burgess said:

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, so that was the only "correct" tuning for a violin A ? :)

There are websites and YouTube channels devoted to the mystic frequency of whatever.

My Cremona shapes hypothesis is that they were aiming for voluptuousness in their curves.

Sexy curves. I defy anyone to naysay.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 452
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

34 minutes ago, sospiri said:

they were aiming for voluptuousness in their curves.

Sexy curves. I defy anyone to naysay.

That's extremely possible and it's possible sound was last on their list.  Cultures have adapted to sounds so that they like them but sound awful to us.  Chinese music for soprano comes to mind

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Bill Merkel said:

That's extremely possible and it's possible sound was last on their list.  Cultures have adapted to sounds so that they like them but sound awful to us.  Chinese music for soprano comes to mind

What's that got to do with sexy curves? Stop changing the subject.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But just for the record, when those Chinese aficionados are discussing what goes into great music or a great soprano, it seems obvious to us they could sound like anything and their response to it is simply their adaptation to it.  No mystery to either as much as it may seem so, right Captain?  There's surely some of that in Western music too, maybe the same amount, which would enable the violin to be built entirely for looks, but sound great as it it was built for sound

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/14/2020 at 6:10 AM, Bruce Carlson said:

As you demonstrated to me a while back, the balance point does not necessarily prove equal area above and below. The shapes are too different. Of those I have tested the balance point is usually further towards the upper bout from the bridge position. I've never found one that balanced right on the line of the inside bridge notches. Same for 'del Gesù'.

It's usually nearer 190 mm. In addition you have with or without bars, possibly some regraduation, cleats and doubling that could skew the test.

We likely would not want the center of mass to be under the bridge, correct?

I think I follow Maestro Kasprzyk's questioning of where the position might be located... also having additional mass at that CoM would generally activate the top more to the edges.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, David Burgess said:

Are you claiming that you are not human? Among humans, is there any such thing as totally neutral observations?

There's that frivolous side again.  Of course not.   To state the same thing more completely, neutral observation is me ideal, and strive to check myself and attain that neutrality as best as I am able.  I do actually strive for that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Bill Merkel said:

But just for the record, when those Chinese aficionados are discussing what goes into great music or a great soprano, it seems obvious to us they could sound like anything and their response to it is simply their adaptation to it.  No mystery to either as much as it may seem so, right Captain?  There's surely some of that in Western music too, maybe the same amount, which would enable the violin to be built entirely for looks, but sound great as it it was built for sound

The inside is shaped for sound, but the outside is shaped like butts 'n boobies.

Discuss.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Michael Darnton said:

 "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.

 

Isn't seeing before you actually look called bias and prejudice?

 

What you're stating here is a hypothesis itself, one which I have previously entertained and tried to test against the evidence.  The evidence says no to your proposed idea.

There is not some simpler alternative that doesn't use 'liberty at the margins'.

And consider this, and system that is actually true has to be as variable as the real examples.

You are denying/ignoring the level of variation shown in the actual historical example.  They do not admit of any cleaner or simpler understand.

The simplest sufficient understanding combines a recipes for each feature presenting very limited choices of geometry and ratio traditionsl to each feature, plus the two complications of 'following rather than correcting' and 'liberty of the margins'.

That is the simplest formulation that accurately stands with the full range of the historical evidence.

It doesn't matter if you resist beacuse this formulation isn't 'what you desired/expected', isn't 'as simple yiu expected', or acknowledges choices in usage that you don't approve.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, David Beard said:

 

Isn't seeing before you actually look called bias and prejudice?

 

What you're stating here is a hypothesis itself, one which I have previously entertained and tried to test against the evidence.  The evidence says no to your proposed idea.

There is not some simpler alternative that doesn't use 'liberty at the margins'.

And consider this, and system that is actually true has to be as variable as the real examples.

You are denying/ignoring the level of variation shown in the actual historical example.  They do not admit of any cleaner or simpler understand.

The simplest sufficient understanding combines a recipes for each feature presenting very limited choices of geometry and ratio traditionsl to each feature, plus the two complications of 'following rather than correcting' and 'liberty of the margins'.

That is the simplest formulation that accurately stands with the full range of the historical evidence.

It doesn't matter if you resist beacuse this formulation isn't 'what you desired/expected', isn't 'as simple yiu expected', or acknowledges choices in usage that you don't approve.

 

What the actual heck?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours 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.

Laying aside the question of whether it is worth the effort to use these methods in new making today, I find it interesting and worth the effort to understand 'what' the old makers did, regardless of how complex or difficult the path might be.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, GoPractice said:

We likely would not want the center of mass to be under the bridge, correct?

I think I follow Maestro Kasprzyk's questioning of where the position might be located... also having additional mass at that CoM would generally activate the top more to the edges.   

Most balance points on bellies of Stradivari violins will fall within the area so marked. Of course this takes into account ' liberty of the margins'.

1428971646_Balancepoint.jpg.4ce6d9b2696ed3a4301399f7cc00ef6e.jpg

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, GoPractice said:

We likely would not want the center of mass to be under the bridge, correct?   

In the majority of Stradivari violin bellies there is no accumulated mass under the bridge as most are very near to uniform thickness. It's just the balance point. That is unless somebody made a massive bassbar or an exaggeratedly thick sound post patch.

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

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.

And that is ideally the beauty behind art, if those who consume it were to be more open-minded.

But as we near the limits of a particular objects purpose, the shapes and proportions and weights and flavors and smells become alike. And that particular purpose may be set or defined by a certain group with whatever interests. I see this in the performance and academic worlds.

The result is that if the price of instruments keep going up and start to sound the same, they will evolve to be more similar. I still prefer instruments whose unique characteristics the maker provides for the eventual performer.

The drawbacks of 360+mm violins is that they often have string lengths that are longer and for some that becomes a problem. And when practicing 10th this morning on a 357mm hybridized Strad model, the hands do suffer. Though the string length of an ex-Stern model was similar, the 353mm length was easier on the hands and body. But when performing in a "baroque" ensemble 360+mm violins are not so much a problem.

I do not entirely disagree with the comment about proportions but the sale of instrument may also hinge on its appearance. I have experienced hundreds of sales that a parent, ultimately making a choice based on appearance, vetoing both the teacher's and student's opinion of an instrument.  

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

The position on the inside of the belly where, free of the rest of the body and ideally without the bassbar will balance on a point, such as a slightly dulled pencil point.

I have no idea what that means Bruce. Can you explain it again please?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, sospiri said:

I have no idea what that means Bruce. Can you explain it again please?

Haven't you ever balanced anything on a point or on a needle? Basketball players do it with a basketball. In that case it has to spin however to remain balanced like a gyroscope. We don't have to spin violin bellies (luckily) because the center of gravity is below the balance point, therefore, gravitationally speaking, stable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

By the by, 'liberty at the margins' does not grant zones of discretion, like in Bruce balance point illustration.  Instead, it grants 0,1,2, or sometimes 3 specific alternative points to choose from.

'Liberty at the Margins' examples:

Ratio between upper and lower soundhole eyes.  0 liberties.

Measuring horizontally from a sound hole eye.  3 liberties: from treble side, bass side, or center.

Measuring a bout or body length. 2 liberties: from edge, or from purf line

Measuring in the head and volute work. 2 liberties. From edge, or camfer.

It isn't capricious.  It isn't squishy.  When such a choice exist, it is a very limited choice between a few well defined specific alternatives.

So you had an assumption about the one and only proper way to measure from a soundhole eye?  Ah. Too bad. The evidence shows the old makers made situation based choices about such details of applying ratios.

Adjust.  Get over it.  Trump didn't win.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, David Beard said:

By the by, 'liberty at the margins' does not grant zones of discretion, like in Bruce balance point illustration.  Instead, it grants 0,1,2, or sometimes 3 specific alternative points ti choose from.

'Liberty at the Margins' examples:

Ratio between upper and lower soundhole eyes.  0 liberties.

Measuring horizontally from a sound hole eye.  3 liberties: from treble side, bass side, or center.

Measuring a bout or body length. 2 liberties: from edge, or from purf line

Measuring in the head and volute work. 2 liberties. From edge, or camfer.

It isn't caprice.  It isn't squishy.  When such a choice exist, it is a very limited choice between a few well defined specific alternatives.

So you had an assumption about the one and only proper way to measure from a soundhole eye?  Ah. Too bad. The evidence shows the old makers made situation based choices about such details of applying ratios.

Adjust.  Get over it.  Trump didn't win.

Well David, you're at liberty to think what you like. The balance point does fall within the area marked, every time.

I didn't vote for DT but I really think we should leave politics out of this talk.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bruce Carlson said:

Haven't you ever balanced anything on a point or on a needle? Basketball players do it with a basketball. In that case it has to spin however to remain balanced like a gyroscope. We don't have to spin violin bellies (luckily) because the center of gravity is below the balance point, therefore, gravitationally speaking, stable.

I'm still not grasping the significance.

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

Well David, you're at liberty to think what you like. The balance point does fall within the area marked, every time.

I didn't vote for DT but I really think we should leave politics out of this talk.

Didn't mean to say your illustration is wrong in any sense. Not at all.

But, it is a different thing than 'liberty at margins'.

 

Is 'the earth isn't flat' also politics?  We are busy here discussing what is or isn't true and how we get to know.

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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.