Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

How does a violin reproduce overtones? - Theorizing a model


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 646
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 hours ago, uncle duke said:

Andreas did ask for a sample and that is what was offered. 

1. For a Sunday morning - pleasant sounding enough for me.

2. The violin on the left is comparable to some Amati's I've heard before. 

3. The player in the middle may not be quite up to snuff technique wise {just my guess} and I just can't make a decision with the instrument on the right other than maybe a little bit more vibration production could help.

4. Do they compose music like that in your native Greenland/Iceland?

1. I thought so.

2. I'm not an Amati expert :) but it surely sounds like no Amati I ever heard before unless recently sat on. I wouldn't know it's specially made to sound like that I would think it sounds like crap. I would but I don't. I know better now.

3. Could be, what do I know ? By the way, you did figure out that all three "instruments" are out of tune and the players don't seem able to agree which note is what ? 

4. Not for long.

I would appreciate if you'd be so kind and place me on your ignore list...  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carl Stross said:

3. Could be, what do I know ? By the way, you did figure out that all three "instruments" are out of tune and the players don't seem able to agree which note is what ? 

I would appreciate if you'd be so kind and place me on your ignore list...  

There is something going on there to be sure.

Ignore list - if I do that I'm afraid I'll simply fall farther behind.  Thinking about it, I wouldn't do that to anybody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Carl Stross said:

I see. 

Well, thank you very much for giving us the opportunity to have a listen -I always wondered how that "anti-violin/viola" of yours sounds.

>

 

 

Good traditional violins usually have a strong D note on the open D string because the that is where the A0 air resonance usually is at 294 Hz.  The B1-  body resonance peak is usually around 450Hz so the open string A note is also often strong.

One tail of the A0 resonance extends to the left of the peak and one tail extends to the right.  Likewise for the B1- resonance.  These tails combine together to give a total output. But the A0 and the B1- resonances are out of phase so the combination of the two tails is low below the A0 peak and is high above the A0 peak.  This has been known for a long time and is shown in John Schelleng's 1962 graph shown below.

The consequence of these two resonance tails being out of phase means the violin's open G string  and the next four notes are weak sounding because their fundamental harmonics are low amplitude.  This happens even with the best violins and this too has been known for a long time and is shown in Saunders' 1937 graph of the note loudness curves of five different Strad violins and their average is shown below.

The first few notes also relatively weak on the E string of Stad violins. So Strad violins are strongly liked even though they have many weak notes. Players learn to adapt to these typically strong and weak notes and anything different requires new additional effort.  Hence players often can easily play new instruments that are similar to the ones they are used to.

The large 5 string viola on the right in the student's video was played as a second violin for that composition and I would characterize its sound as more of an inverse or upside down version of a Strad violin sound.  Its lower notes on the G string show some strength because its A0 frequency is 196Hz.   The notes near the open E string are strong whereas its open A string is rather weak due to the locations of other resonance peaks. Its Saunders loudness curve, shown below, is superimposed upon a portion of the average Strad violin curve with the same scale.

So you are right this is 5 string viola is sort of an anti-violin.

 

 

 

Screen Shot 2021-07-25 at 7.21.09 PM.png

828686181_ScreenShot2021-07-25at9_02_11AM.png

Screen Shot 2021-07-25 at 7.49.08 PM.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Carl Stross said:

I see. 

Well, thank you very much for giving us the opportunity to have a listen -I always wondered how that "anti-violin/viola" of yours sounds.

You probably don't know this but there was in the '60s a Hungarian (?) maker who tried to duplicate all the strings with appropriately tweaked violin like objects. I heard small chamber assembles playing his instruments and it wasn't intolerable. Not an experience one would wish to repeat either...

 

In a broader view we should remember that the violin as we know it today had, when it was just invented, an ‘unusual’ sound. But composers and musicians became interested in this new sound spinning off the long history and development of one of the most interesting musical instruments. Nobody of us will know which path Marty’s instruments will take in future. We tend to measure ‘unusual’ from what we believe to be the’standard’. But in the end it is just a new variation of a a known sound. In synthesized music we have a much bigger tolerance for new sound effects. 
 

Marty’s instruments are definitely not made for classic compositions but I don’t think they are ‘bad’. 

18 hours ago, Don Noon said:

You could say that they sound like their maker.

You can say this about any maker. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Andreas Preuss said:

1. In a broader view we should remember that the violin as we know it today had, when it was just invented, an ‘unusual’ sound.

2. But composers and musicians became interested in this new sound spinning off the long history and development of one of the most interesting musical instruments.

3. Nobody of us will know which path Marty’s instruments will take in future. We tend to measure ‘unusual’ from what we believe to be the’standard’.

4. But in the end it is just a new variation of a a known sound. 

5. In synthesized music we have a much bigger tolerance for new sound effects. 
 

6. Marty’s instruments are definitely not made for classic compositions but I don’t think they are ‘bad’. 

7. You can say this about any maker. 

1. Why ???  Do you believe that "unusual sound" predicts success ? :)

2. The "new sound" was a logical continuation of the old sound. The new instrument added valuable technical capabilities. 

3. Well, I think some of us just might... :)

4.  Was there anything wrong with the original sound ? Did Beethoven complain ? :)

5. No, we do NOT if the effects lack musical character.

6. Instruments are "bad" if they do not "work", i.e. the are inherently false, hard to play, do not sound musical etc etc etc etc etc etc 

7. I've no idea how makers sound - I'll have to trust you on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"It's hard to make predictions--especially about the future."

 

Some viola players like the sound, especially on the C string, of large violas that were traditionally used in the past.  Unfortunately these heavy and long violas are strenuous to hold and player injuries were common (https://www.sciandmed.com/mppa) so most players today often use shorter and lighter violas and accept the type of sound they produce.

So my efforts have been to try to duplicate the sound of traditional large violas with a much lighter and shorter ergonomic one to reduce future injuries of players and to help the recovery of players who are already injured.

Weight has been reduced through material substitutions and cavity shape redesigns that I've previously shown.  I'm trying to get viola's the A0 resonance frequency as low as possible with a high amplitude to get strong fundamentals on the lower notes which helps achieve a rich sound.

A low A0 frequency can be achieved by having a small f hole area and a large internal cavity volume but  a small f hole area unfortunately also reduces the sound output.  It is therefore better to increase the cavity volume.  Attempts in the past to make a short violas with large volumes by using high rib heights and wide bout widths but these len to some holding difficulties for the player's left hand and chin placement.

A better way of increasing the internal volume is to use a variable rib height where a high rib height doesn't interfere with holding such as at the lower bout right side and upper bout left side and a low rib height is used at the upper right side and lower bout left side.

The twisted back plate mimics the curved shape of a shoulder rest to make the viola naturally easy to hold and it also reflects the author's mind set.  Attached is a photo of a styrofoam mock up of a viola now being built.

 

I predict Carl won't like it.

 

 

2021_07_26_0509.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

"It's hard to make predictions--especially about the future."

 

Some viola players like the sound, especially on the C string, of large violas that were traditionally used in the past.  Unfortunately these heavy and long violas are strenuous to hold and player injuries were common (https://www.sciandmed.com/mppa) so most players today often use shorter and lighter violas and accept the type of sound they produce.

So my efforts have been to try to duplicate the sound of traditional large violas with a much lighter and shorter ergonomic one to reduce future injuries of players and to help the recovery of players who are already injured.

Weight has been reduced through material substitutions and cavity shape redesigns that I've previously shown.  I'm trying to get viola's the A0 resonance frequency as low as possible with a high amplitude to get strong fundamentals on the lower notes which helps achieve a rich sound.

A low A0 frequency can be achieved by having a small f hole area and a large internal cavity volume but  a small f hole area unfortunately also reduces the sound output.  It is therefore better to increase the cavity volume.  Attempts in the past to make a short violas with large volumes by using high rib heights and wide bout widths but these len to some holding difficulties for the player's left hand and chin placement.

A better way of increasing the internal volume is to use a variable rib height where a high rib height doesn't interfere with holding such as at the lower bout right side and upper bout left side and a low rib height is used at the upper right side and lower bout left side.

The twisted back plate mimics the curved shape of a shoulder rest to make the viola naturally easy to hold and it also reflects the author's mind set.  Attached is a photo of a styrofoam mock up of a viola now being built.

 

I predict Carl won't like it.

 

 

2021_07_26_0509.JPG

Actually, I like it just fine and I understood the motivations as per your explanations.

My objections ( rather observations ) have nothing to do with shape but with the tone and "working" of the instruments. On close listening you will notice how all the instruments in that trio have problems focusing and exhibit numerous dead patches where instead of singing, they grunt. Should you be able to fix those issues ( not the only ones... ) you will still be left ( in my opinion ) with tonally inflexible and monochromatic instruments. I surely hope that is not the future of string tone. It's probably wonderful to try help viola players with less injurious instruments. But if that comes at such cost, such departure from "standard" tone I think very few people will become fans. More so when a proper solution already exists : use a small cello. There is nothing a viola however large can do that a small cello can not do WAY better. As an added bonus that also does away with "viola players" which are almost by definition only marginally competent, constantly fall asleep on stage and replaces them with wonderfully expressive, technically astute cello players. Win-win.

I'll comment later on your previous post.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

1. Good traditional violins usually have a strong D note on the open D string because the that is where the A0 air resonance usually is at 294 Hz.  The B1-  body resonance peak is usually around 450Hz so the open string A note is also often strong.

One tail of the A0 resonance extends to the left of the peak and one tail extends to the right.  Likewise for the B1- resonance.  These tails combine together to give a total output. But the A0 and the B1- resonances are out of phase so the combination of the two tails is low below the A0 peak and is high above the A0 peak.  This has been known for a long time and is shown in John Schelleng's 1962 graph shown below.

The consequence of these two resonance tails being out of phase means the violin's open G string  and the next four notes are weak sounding because their fundamental harmonics are low amplitude.  This happens even with the best violins and this too has been known for a long time and is shown in Saunders' 1937 graph of the note loudness curves of five different Strad violins and their average is shown below.

The first few notes also relatively weak on the E string of Stad violins. So Strad violins are strongly liked even though they have many weak notes. Players learn to adapt to these typically strong and weak notes and anything different requires new additional effort.  Hence players often can easily play new instruments that are similar to the ones they are used to.

2. The large 5 string viola on the right in the student's video was played as a second violin for that composition and I would characterize its sound as more of an inverse or upside down version of a Strad violin sound.  Its lower notes on the G string show some strength because its A0 frequency is 196Hz.   The notes near the open E string are strong whereas its open A string is rather weak due to the locations of other resonance peaks. Its Saunders loudness curve, shown below, is superimposed upon a portion of the average Strad violin curve with the same scale.

So you are right this is 5 string viola is sort of an anti-violin.

1.  This would warrant a lengthy discussion with some sound clips brought in for good measure. Myself, do not see anything relevant about the behavior you describe. With the exception of the boomy D , something a good setup expert can attend to, the reminder work just fine in the context of proper violin playing. The graphs you supplied do not reflect proper violin playing and by looking at them I am unable to figure out how those violins might've sounded. They are a picture of a sound which never happened and will never happen.

2. My issue there is not the balance of the "sound" but it's character. The timbre is far from a Strad's, is monochromatic and unfocused. That's just for starters... A violin sounds like a violin because it's "engine" is built like a violin's. I think you fiddled too much with that engine and now, despite using a bow to scratch a string, it's become something else. In consequence, numerous "effects" one expects to hear with violin tone are missing there. I think that's to a large extent built into the "architecture" of the violin's propulsion system. 

That is actually what I meant when I said it's an anti-violin.

Here's a wonderful viola by Roger Hargrave :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKRRd0pI59k

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Anders Buen said:

Sanders plots are quite unique being bowed instrument responses. The loudness given at a given note is the loudness you may expect while playing that note. He played each half note as loud he could.

Presumably thise dB levels are the composite loudness as measured by a microphone.  To evaluate the loudness as perceived by the human ear, I think you'd have to take each harmonic component, adjust it by the ISO loudness curve, then recombine it all.  Then it doesn't really tell you whether the sound is generally desirable or not, which is something else entirely.

Marty - re: 5 string viola with A0 at 196Hz... yes, you'd get some more roundness on the low G string notes.  However, that does other things.  On the low C string, the A0 is still too far away to help.  And looking at the next 3 overtones, the fall into response dips, which seems to me would make the low C string extremely weak. 

I have taken the opposite approach on my viola, using relatively large F holes and small body to keep the A0 up around C, where it gives some reinforcement to the 1st overtone of the C string.  The size of the plates shifts the other resonant frequencies down relative to the violin, giving a tone that is distinctly different from the violin without getting to radical about things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At this time of the year I always take some measurments of my close copy violins (high RH) comparing to previous years.

Modes and overtones change as predicted, but one of them with lesser performance wood is always dull with much less overtones in summertime, than the other ones (they loose some strength in overtones too, but not as much)

I think the wood has more influence than the other factors.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Don Noon said:

Presumably thise dB levels are the composite loudness as measured by a microphone.  To evaluate the loudness as perceived by the human ear, I think you'd have to take each harmonic component, adjust it by the ISO loudness curve, then recombine it all.  Then it doesn't really tell you whether the sound is generally desirable or not, which is something else entirely.

I think he had an early version of a spectrum analyzer he controlled using his foot and added the contribution from each harmonic manually. However, I do not understand completely how it was done. (I have copies of his articles so may figure out)
The ISO equal loudness curves does not do all that much to violin sounds because the major part of the spectrum is in the flatter region of the relevant curve, which is a rather loud one for a player. A bit weaker one for a listener. In principle the curves will look much the same with and without such corrections. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Anders Buen said:

I think he had an early version of a spectrum analyzer he controlled using his foot and added the contribution from each harmonic manually. However, I do not understand completely how it was done. (I have copies of his articles so may figure out)
The ISO equal loudness curves does not do all that much to violin sounds because the major part of the spectrum is in the flatter region of the relevant curve, which is a rather loud one for a player. A bit weaker one for a listener. In principle the curves will look much the same with and without such corrections. 

No matter how I look on the whole problem, the key to a projecting sound is the ‘singer Formant’ region of the sound spectrum. (The other day I read a paper which examined the ‘sound power’ of Swedish tenor Jussi Bjorling. And well, his peak sound output was at 2800Hz and his voice trained to add to each sung note high frequencies in that region) 

In this context I was wondering if it would help to filter in a recording setup all frequencies which are not thought to be important .

On the other hand, if I look on the spectrum of one played note I should be able to see somewhere which overtones are strongest?

In terms of instrument making it seems that this is all in the strength and width of the bridge hill resonance. While some adjustments apparently can be made on the bridge itself, the cross stiffness of the top is of major interest. Did anyone ever try to increase the top cross stiffness with additional bars to see how the spectrum changes? My unscientific guess is that this would work best at the narrowest part of the plate between the c bouts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A things come to mind.

Most of all, as others have said in this thread already, the strings themselves and player are the source of the high overtones.

So that implies that the violin's job is not to create those formant high tones, but to give them a place to build energy and then radiate as strong component of the 'signal'.

The other thing is that these higher frequencies components correspond to a patchwork of physically short standing waves in the plate, and a patchwork of physically smallish air volumes in the air body.  

This suggests that larger scale design elements like the bar and the arching would be comparatively less significant for these frequencies.  

But a big factor would be comparatively thin and flexible plates that can readily break up into a patchwork of driven standing waves.  But the plates need to balance this by also being thick enough to move in more unified ways for lower modes of vibration.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, David Beard said:

Most of all, as others have said in this thread already, the strings themselves and player are the source of the high overtones.

While this absolutely correct, there are violins which have a better ‘pre condition’ than others. Or, they are more ticklish to the bow arm of a skilled player.

 

11 minutes ago, David Beard said:

This suggests that larger scale design elements like the bar and the arching would be comparatively less significant for these frequencies.

Here I am not sure at all. If the tripled linings on the top changed anything to an audible degree it was ‘overtones’. So without trying to figure out why, it is on my ‘recipe list’. 

14 minutes ago, David Beard said:

But a big factor would be comparatively thin and flexible plates that can readily break up into a patchwork of driven standing waves.  But the plates need to balance this by also being thick enough to move in more unified ways for lower modes of vibration.

Instead of plates I would say the behavior of the top plate is the main key. I can say also that measuring a top plate in terms of tap tones, reveals almost nothing. In contrary it seems to be a goal to kill the ring of tap tones. My experimental bent plate is now down to 47g without bar and has literally no tap tones, only a vague blurry ‘blob’ which I can’t even measure. The last graphs in this condition are essentially not ‘bad’ and the violin has not any more major problems.

Your description of the behavior of high frequencies looks to me like the holograms when the exciting frequency was in the 2 - 4khz range. I don’t know if this can be seen like this when a lower note is played and you see in holograms larger surface areas vibrating, but still overtones are audible. 
 

The bridge hill resonance which lies exactly in this area is certainly of major interest. So you have something rigid enough to resonate in this frequency range. My unscientific guess is that the total of this resistance comes from the combined length and cross stiffness of the body (a sort of multiplication of both) The weakest element in this structure is the top and we know that equally thinning down the entire surface of the top lowers the cross stiffness  much faster than the length stiffness. Additionally I think (despite Dons contrary arguments) that the top can stiffen itself lengthwise with the help of the string tension. Cross grain this is impossible. 
 

I am working right now on an enlarged x shaped bass bar which in theory should be able to increase the cross stiffness. At the same time I am implanting an entire edge doubling with 0.8mm plywood. If this doesn’t work I need to find better material for the top. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Andreas Preuss said:

Here I am not sure at all. If the tripled linings on the top changed anything to an audible degree it was ‘overtones’. So without trying to figure out why, it is on my ‘recipe list’. 

I think this is the exception to my point.  The extra strength in the linings, particular through the cBouts, helps make the top in comparison more flexibly or independently movable.  

My point was more that many of the shaped elements, like the center back mass, the archings, the bar, the post, even the way the soundholes cuts up the plate, these are about enabling certain modes of vibrations, but lower ones.

The freedom and strength of higher frequencies depends mostly on just a few specific aspects of the instrument.  I think these include sufficient thinness in the top plate and the 'daiphragm' parts of the back, thinness in the actual ribs, contrasting 'out of plane' strength in the sides from the working of linings and edges and approach to edges, and on the bridge table and it's relationship to post bar and bridge.

There could be other specific factors. But these are the ones I see so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Andreas Preuss said:

 if I look on the spectrum of one played note I should be able to see somewhere which overtones are strongest?

Of course you can.  You have Audacity... play a note and look at the FFT spectrum of it.  Where the overtones are the strongest will vary radically from note to note, as the body response has all kinds of sharp peaks and dips in the high frequency response.  Really good violins I think will have less dips, and thus more overall output in the overtones.

1 hour ago, David Beard said:

This suggests that larger scale design elements like the bar and the arching would be comparatively less significant for these (higher) frequencies.  

I'm not that quick to dismiss arching.  While the patchwork of antinodes might appear to ignore arching, according to my estimates, the arching can do significant things to area of the antinodes, which in turn would do significant things to output. 

It is a shame that the Strad3D animations are blocked by the fingerboard, and can't show what's going on in this critical area.  Here the crossarching is usually the tightest radius, and where I believe a major part of the high frequency power radiates from.

31 minutes ago, Andreas Preuss said:

Additionally I think (despite Dons contrary arguments) that the top can stiffen itself lengthwise with the help of the string tension.

Ignore facts at your peril.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Don Noon said:

Ignore facts at your peril.

I ignore facts which claim things I can’t verify in experiments in an audible way. I always need to hear something. So on the other hand, even if I get a completely different graph and don’t hear anything it’s just telling me don’t go further. In the end I only need recipes which work. I leave the explanation to those who have the knowledge. 
 

Somehow technically the idea that, for what reason ever, the body is getting stabilized lengthwise with the string tension works in my intuitive good-guess approach. Seems to be in scientific terms the wrong explanation for something else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Don Noon said:

 

It is a shame that the Strad3D animations are blocked by the fingerboard, and can't show what's going on in this critical area.  Here the crossarching is usually the tightest radius, and where I believe a major part of the high frequency power radiates from.

Which area do you mean precisely? The tightest curve of the arching is in area where you can see it, just above the ff. (red) 

if you are thinking more of the area marked in green the arching can be pretty flat already depending of how much arch height reduction you allow from the highest point. 652ECFFB-F370-4C7B-88F2-B74EE2FCFC36.thumb.jpeg.9fef1c5788dd384261e86d54fbc54a8b.jpeg

if it is the latter you can almost think of arch deformation as a cause(so in the end it is related to forces and stress) which deform a perfect circle segment line length arch into a an arched flattened under the bridge and bulging up under the fingerboard and tailpiece. 
 

But no matter what you do with wood, I think that all receipes based on some sort of calculations are short of the optimum. I am rather looking for something where (exaggeratedly saying) the string force can deform the entire structure to its best sounding properties. Repeated wetting is nothing I am trying to avoid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Andreas Preuss said:

I am rather looking for something where (exaggeratedly saying) the string force can deform the entire structure to its best sounding properties. 

Ultra thin ribs along with small, weak corner blocks will enable the deformation but you will still need optimum plate thickness, not necessarily thin, to get best sounding properties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/26/2021 at 6:24 PM, Don Noon said:

Presumably thise dB levels are the composite loudness as measured by a microphone.  To evaluate the loudness as perceived by the human ear, I think you'd have to take each harmonic component, adjust it by the ISO loudness curve, then recombine it all.  Then it doesn't really tell you whether the sound is generally desirable or not, which is something else entirely.

Marty - re: 5 string viola with A0 at 196Hz... yes, you'd get some more roundness on the low G string notes.  However, that does other things.  On the low C string, the A0 is still too far away to help.  And looking at the next 3 overtones, the fall into response dips, which seems to me would make the low C string extremely weak. 

I have taken the opposite approach on my viola, using relatively large F holes and small body to keep the A0 up around C, where it gives some reinforcement to the 1st overtone of the C string.  The size of the plates shifts the other resonant frequencies down relative to the violin, giving a tone that is distinctly different from the violin without getting to radical about things.

I very much agree that reinforcing a small viola's 1st over tones on the C string with the A0 resonance is a good strategy.

However listener tests on small violas have shown that a low A0 is preferred.  The Oberlin Violin Makers' "Obialto 2017 Project" (https://hampel-geigenbau.de/en/plus/obialto) designed a 16inch (406mm) viola and had a bunch of identical molds made by CNC machining.  These were given to  individuals the group and 26 violas were made with the same outline shape and size but with their own various personal choices of plate arch heights and shapes, thicknesses, f hole shapes, wood etc.

These were all tested to find their frequency response curves.  About 50 listeners evaluated them when played by a good professional player.

The group's average preference rating showed a general trend of preferring a low A0 frequency as shown in the attached graph.

There also seems to be a strong preference for having light weight top plates as shown in another attached graph.

I had mentioned in my previous posts that the A0 frequency is dependent upon the cavity volume and f hole but I forgot to say that a high cavity wall compliance (flexibility of the plates and ribs) also lowers the A0 frequency.

I would like to see similar listening testing done on about 25 different size violas.  I would expect larger violas made with relatively thin plates would be preferred.  But they are not popular because of player injury problems--hence the Oberlin group chose to work on a small viola design.

 

Screen Shot 2021-07-27 at 9.27.09 PM.png

Screen Shot 2021-07-27 at 9.24.29 PM.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Andreas Preuss said:

Which area do you mean precisely? The tightest curve of the arching is in area where you can see it, just above the ff.

Basically, everything blanked out by the fingerboard, which is more than your diagram.  This is a mode at ~3000 Hz, and shows there's something significant going on under the fingerboard.  I'd like to see the details.

98990704_3khztitian.jpg.f9aba49aceb813d2585beb197185b3b7.jpg

40 minutes ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

I very much agree that reinforcing a small viola's 1st over tones on the C string with the A0 resonance is a good strategy.

However listener tests on small violas have shown that a low A0 is preferred.

Marty,  I don't see how you can attribute a preference to A0 alone, as it is a function of construction features which may (and I would say probably are) creating other tonal effects which are preferred.  Most notably, I see that lighter tops appear to be even more strongly correlated to preference, and presumably lower A0 is inversely correlated with plate weights... thus lighter plates might be the driver for preference, and lower A0 just a meaningless side effect.

I think it is notable that the highest preference went to the viola with the 2nd lightest plate, but was also among the highest A0 frequencies.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, uncle duke said:

Ultra thin ribs along with small, weak corner blocks will enable the deformation but you will still need optimum plate thickness, not necessarily thin, to get best sounding properties.

Experimental results showed that this is exactly the opposite. I started the new concept violin with .2 thick ribs and tiny linings. Corner blocks were reduced to the bare minimum and made of balsa wood. The result was an extremely dull sounding instrument. Nothing I would ever consider to repeat or re-examine. Thickness of plates was initially rather thick and slightly heavier than normal. No reduction could bring the sound close to ‘acceptable’. The first step in this direction was to make solid linings on the top side.

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...