Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Plate tuning


Crimson0087
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 379
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

5 hours ago, Peter K-G said:

Anyway who cares, wives may come and go these days.

Back to business. Why in the He.. would someone try to tune a plate while graduating, it's obvious that you would have to do severe compromise to anything normal.

ok back to plate tuning.

It could be helpful to know when to stop thinning a plate before no wood is left.  The attached paper was written a few years ago and I'm posting it again on MN for new readers and for some of us older ones who can't remember anything.

plate thin strat.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

It could be helpful to know when to stop thinning a plate before no wood is left.  

The most helpful, IMO, from the paper:

"Just make your top plates to weigh about 65g with the bass bar and forget about all the above stuff."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Don Noon said:

The most helpful, IMO, from the paper:

"Just make your top plates to weigh about 65g with the bass bar and forget about all the above stuff."

I prefer 66.6 grams to be precise, using all the help I can get....could it be, perhaps...:rolleyes: call me little sunshine :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

ok back to plate tuning.

It could be helpful to know when to stop thinning a plate before no wood is left.  The attached paper was written a few years ago and I'm posting it again on MN for new readers and for some of us older ones who can't remember anything.

plate thin strat.pdf 73.31 kB · 19 downloads

If you have no knowledge about your wood, like density and stiffness, plate tuning is pretty meaningless.

For example if you have an extremly stiff top wood (~6500 m/s super spruce) and you decide to make a Willemotte copy and go for high arch,

You will end up with a M5 like ~390 Hz, when you are at the graduation scheme thicknesses. So what, could someone say.  Sure so what, but it will for sure be very far from Willemotte in playability and sound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Peter K-G said:

... but it will for sure be very far from Willemotte in playability and sound.

That could be said about any attempt to copy a good Strad, but the less attention you give to the details, the farther it's likely to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

From the article:

"7. What do you do if you're not a control freak?
Just make your top plates to weigh about 65g with the bass bar and forget about all the
above stuff.
Twist and bend the plates to get a feel of their stiffness and to impress onlookers that you know what you're doing."

Ha ha, that's good! :)
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Don Noon said:

That could be said about any attempt to copy a good Strad, but the less attention you give to the details, the farther it's likely to be.

Fully agree!

I think, if it would be possible to know the properties of wood for both top and back as close as possible, then arching, weight, graduation and taptones the same, you could be very close in playability and sound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gary M said:

Our teacher weighed our top plates this week. In retrospect, not a bad number.

20220226_143435.jpg

It really depends!

Is the density 0.35 or 0.48 and how thick/thin is it compared to that. More important, is it a "full" arched one that exceeds 450 cm3 before hollowing out

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Peter K-G said:

Weight, graduation/thickness, taptones have no meaning if you don't know your wood

Not claiming anything here. Just an amusing coincidence that the number was exactly as quoted earlier in the post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gary M said:

Not claiming anything here. Just an amusing coincidence that the number was exactly as quoted earlier in the post.

Quite often the weight is within the ballpark for low density wood, because the maker has "the common weight number 65 g, which is not that common btw, they vary a lot".

So it is fairly easy to make a top ~65 g for low dens spruce. What is not considered is that the thickness might be far off(too thin, for the density), because the arching is too full.

+/- 50 cm3 at arching stage will give  +/- ~10-15 g for the same density and thickness. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/27/2022 at 7:10 AM, Peter K-G said:

+/- 50 cm3 at arching stage will give  +/- ~10-15 g for the same density and thickness. 

Is this the difference in volume of plate before hollowing?  If so, what are typical total volumes? 

My most recent was 450cm3 which I suspect is on the high end of the range.   That violin is very sweet but may not project as well as others.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, David Stiles said:

Is this the difference in volume of plate before hollowing?  If so, what are typical total volumes? 

My most recent was 450cm3 which I suspect is on the high end of the range.   That violin is very sweet but may not project as well as others.   

Yes, if you could have made it 400 cm3, you would have the plate ~10-15 g less weight, with the same thickness. But it would also have lowered M5 a lot if you had took the voulume down, mostly by lowering the arch height.

If the wood is stiff you can have a lower arch and reduce the volume more.

=> Powerful violin, as you don't have to make it thin to reduce weight.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Peter K-G said:

Yes, if you could have made it 400 cm3, you would have the plate ~10-15 g less weight, with the same thickness. But it would also have lowered M5 a lot if you had took the voulume down, mostly by lowering the arch height.

If the wood is stiff you can have a lower arch and reduce the volume more.

=> Powerful violin, as you don't have to make it thin to reduce weight.

 

Where is  your volume 400cm3 number coming from?  

If a top plate weighing 64g made with 0.4g/cm3 spruce wood the volume V is: 64/0.4 = 160cm3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Marty Kasprzyk said:

Where is  your volume 400cm3 number coming from?  

If a top plate weighing 64g made with 0.4g/cm3 spruce wood the volume V is: 64/0.4 = 160cm3

Before hollowing out, that's when the volume and frequencies matter ;)

It's to late to start measuring frequencies/taptones when hollowing out the inside

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Peter K-G said:

Yes, if you could have made it 400 cm3, you would have the plate ~10-15 g less weight, with the same thickness. But it would also have lowered M5 a lot if you had took the voulume down, mostly by lowering the arch height.

Thanks, this makes sense.  I did have a high M5 and plate ended up very thin.  My arching height was 16.5mm and I think it was a also bit full on the cross arches, particularly upper bout.  

For the record, before hollowing, weight was 170g and M5 was 640Hz.  If I had reduced it down to 400cm3 it would have weighed around 150g and M5 would have been considerably lower.     Do these figures sound right? 

Maybe this is the branch of plate tuning that is useful. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your calculations looks right. For such a plate with ~0.38 density, upper and lower bouts should be 2.3-2.5 mm, not thinner (for that density)

If you also had managed to bring the volume down, the plate would have been light even not thin, this gives a sweet even, yet powerful/projecting sound.

Though the real base power comes from a great matching back

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, David Stiles said:

Maybe this is the branch of plate tuning that is useful. 

And maybe not.  Although I do know one very successful pro that uses something like this as part of his routine, most do not.

I tried this type of tuning once... with no notable difference from everything else I've made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Don Noon said:

And maybe not.  Although I do know one very successful pro that uses something like this as part of his routine, most do not.

I tried this type of tuning once... with no notable difference from everything else I've made.

Thanks Don, I'll take that on board.  For me, it should be a useful method to calibrate myself as I learn arching. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Peter K-G said:

This is not a political forum, but G who would have thought the world is going to take a turn like this!!
 

This is not going to end well!

God bless all of us!

At the risk of being kicked off the board or being shunned by supporters of these aggressions on innocent persons ,  I am  Not exactly religious but amen  !  For we are all related. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks guys!

I think, our debates here, even sometimes rediculous and full of emotions, are actually healthy.

I have joked about how we kicked out R......, we didn't, but we where as those yellow,blue ones. My grandfather, did not long ago, get a medalion on his grave, after sealed documents was disclosed.

I really, really pray, because it does not look good!

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...