Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

Opinions on finishing of this violin bridge?


hnryhouuu

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

3 hours ago, hnryhouuu said:

It does fit as it should be, but I’m just curious is any sound is lost because of how it is cut

I'd tend to doubt it loses much that you'd want.  The blank was rather expensive, and the bridge looks carefully cut.  The style is a matter of taste, as has been already noted.  Don't confuse loud sound with good sound. Some sounds need to be lost (filtered out) by a well-cut bridge.   :)

The second bridge that you show, as @FiddleDoug said, is little more than a blank, with the feet shaped some, and E-string parchment applied.  IMHO, it looks like a $20 music store special.  :mellow:

EDIT:  And as @Davide Sora notes below, all bridges should be individually and specifically cut to suit the acoustics of a single violin.  I'm assuming that the first one shown was.  The other I'm not that sure about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, hnryhouuu said:

 I’m just curious is any sound is lost because of how it is cut

 

2 hours ago, hnryhouuu said:

How does it compare to this?

It is not possible to compare two different bridges of different violins, the dimensions of the cutouts change from bridge to bridge depending on what is needed for the violin it is on. If it works well for that violin, it will be a functionally correct bridge. If we then want to judge the aesthetics, I really don't like either of the two bridges you show, the Milo Stamm with such angular kidneys I really don't like it, the Aubert is a little better but it's too massive, with the kidneys too small and the legs (arch) too high and massive. But it's just my aesthetic taste, for the sound it would be too unreliable to give an opinion without having heard how the violin sounds with that given bridge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The upper curve seems a bit odd but it could be distorsion from the camera. The kidneys reminds me of Peter Prier's bridges although yours are a bit more extreme. Overall I think it should work. It's much better than the second one IMO. Personally, I would shave off more wood from the legs. Perhaps you took away more wood than needed? Or maybe just enough. Why are you asking btw? It's also a question of who's gonna play it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bridge looks evil, but it is the month of Halloween.  No one knows if this bridge is the best one for your instrument by just looking at it.  

The bridge has a mechanical function.  The two things you can control are the mass and the bending frequency of the waist.  Did you make any of these measurements?  Looks do not count.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/19/2023 at 2:43 AM, Guido said:

Style and preferences aside.

The first bridge looks like they tried very hard; the second bridge looks like they didn’t try hard enough.

As they are I’d prefer the first one. If they were mine, I’d prefer the second one and take the knife to it.

Yup.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t like either particularly, but it is impossible to judge the performance, from a picture, especially from a jaunty angle.

Having said that, the curve of the first bridge looks unusually flat, and heavily biased towards the D string. Bridge 2 has a more expected radius.

What I hate most, is the brand stamp being left on, that is pure toytown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can't really answer your questions about "how much sound is lost", since we can't agree on a definition of Sound, can't quantify it anyway, and most of all, can't hear the apple and the orange you want us to comment on. 

 

Would you consider yourself a "nervous player"? As in, the kind that goes in for an adjustment every couple weeks, has strong opinions about how the various luthiers you visit do their work for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/18/2023 at 10:05 AM, hnryhouuu said:

It does fit as it should be, but I’m just curious is any sound is lost because of how it is cut

You might find that these expositions are more at your level:  https://trianglestrings.com/carving-a-violin-bridge/   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEwWvDbc2Og

A search on this forum looking for bridge carving threads can locate other technical information for you, having to do with theories about what cutting on the bridge does acoustically.  To really understand this subject, you have to start cutting your own, but don't risk your fingers doing it.  :)

4 hours ago, JacksonMaberry said:

We can't really answer your questions about "how much sound is lost", since we can't agree on a definition of Sound, can't quantify it anyway, and most of all, can't hear the apple and the orange you want us to comment on. 

 

Would you consider yourself a "nervous player"? As in, the kind that goes in for an adjustment every couple weeks, has strong opinions about how the various luthiers you visit do their work for you?

I suspect that it's due more to perfectionism than to "nervousness".  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Violadamore said:

You might find that these expositions are more at your level:  https://trianglestrings.com/carving-a-violin-bridge/   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEwWvDbc2Og

A search on this forum looking for bridge carving threads can locate other technical information for you, having to do with theories about what cutting on the bridge does acoustically.  To really understand this subject, you have to start cutting your own, but don't risk your fingers doing it.  :)

I suspect that it's due more to perfectionism than to "nervousness".  :)

That is a more politic term for neurosis, to be sure. =P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OP, the first bridge isn't really my taste. It's not cut by someone who has the best sensibilities,  it it'll work I guess. 

The second bridge is just a blank. They fit the feet, did the heights and arches the front and called it a day. 

If I'm being frank, they both look rather amateur. Both for different reasons. Although, they both have a thing or two that subpar bridges often have. One of which is the fact that the ankles were left full width. An actual professional cut will put them somewhere in the ballpark of 3.5-4mm wide. I'm not talking about the thickness from the side, btw. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/20/2023 at 6:36 PM, Wood Butcher said:

I don’t like either particularly, but it is impossible to judge the performance, from a picture, especially from a jaunty angle.

Having said that, the curve of the first bridge looks unusually flat, and heavily biased towards the D string. Bridge 2 has a more expected radius.

What I hate most, is the brand stamp being left on, that is pure toytown.

Toytown as in Jacques Francais shop??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leaving the brand stamp on the bridge, is like a comfort blanket for the cripplingly thick. Something for those with zero idea of how to tell a good bridge, from one on a beginners instrument.

As you well know, all the skill in making an excellent bridge, comes from the ability and experience of the person cutting it. Within a given grade of bridge blank, the quality of wood varies enormously, and some tend to be regraded at the shop. The brand stamp, in and of itself, is therefore meaningless in demonstrating the quality and success of the finished bridge.
The shop stamp on the front, and whoever's initials are written under the bridge, is a different matter.

Over time these brand stamps have become larger, darker, and more garish. I don't want to be looking at that.
In the past, the Aubert stamp was more pressed into the wood, and was at least subtle, being slightly browned.

To sum up, if I gave you a $3.50 blank, and a $40.00 blank to someone without your experience, it is obvious that you would produce the best bridge regardless, both in terms of appearance and performance. Someone thick, can only see one has a large logo emblazoned on the back, and would then judge the quality from this. I doubt that would leave you feeling pleased.

Also, when I am having a bridge replaced, I go to people who know what they are doing, and trust them fully. I don't need it to have all manner of nonsense stamped on it, so that I feel I got what I paid for.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Wood Butcher said:

Leaving the brand stamp on the bridge, is like a comfort blanket for the cripplingly thick. Something for those with zero idea of how to tell a good bridge, from one on a beginners instrument.

As you well know, all the skill in making an excellent bridge, comes from the ability and experience of the person cutting it. Within a given grade of bridge blank, the quality of wood varies enormously, and some tend to be regraded at the shop. The brand stamp, in and of itself, is therefore meaningless in demonstrating the quality and success of the finished bridge.
The shop stamp on the front, and whoever's initials are written under the bridge, is a different matter.

Over time these brand stamps have become larger, darker, and more garish. I don't want to be looking at that.
In the past, the Aubert stamp was more pressed into the wood, and was at least subtle, being slightly browned.

To sum up, if I gave you a $3.50 blank, and a $40.00 blank to someone without your experience, it is obvious that you would produce the best bridge regardless, both in terms of appearance and performance. Someone thick, can only see one has a large logo emblazoned on the back, and would then judge the quality from this. I doubt that would leave you feeling pleased.

Also, when I am having a bridge replaced, I go to people who know what they are doing, and trust them fully. I don't need it to have all manner of nonsense stamped on it, so that I feel I got what I paid for.

 

I agree, I've never liked leaving factory branding on my bridges. It seems to me like shifting the responsibilities onto them, while it is whoever cuts the bridge who has to fully assume them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So far, nobody has said anything about weight, which I think is important and easy to measure.  Visually, you'd expect the first bridge to be lighter and the second one to be a lot heavier.  But density can vary quite a bit, and not always easy to tell by looking at them.  Some makers like to tune the rocking frequency, although I haven't found that to be as important as weight.

I'll add another vote for getting rid of the bridge manufacturer's stamp.

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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...