Violin Forum/Message Board

[famuswood]

Just when I thought it was safe to say my first violin project was going pretty well, I discovered the neck length in the Ossman book is several millimeters longer than my Roth Violin, and the template in the Johnson/Courtnall book by well over a centimeter. Is there that much of a difference among violin patterns? Thanks for any feedback.

[rs]

If the question is about overall neck length, this can vary from fiddle to fiddle. There are, however, three measurements that are important if not crucial for a satisfactory neck.

The first is the distance of the neck when set from nut to top.
The second is the span between the heel and the head.
The third is the distance from nut to mortise.
Of the three, the first two are the most important. The third one can vary a shade and be adjusted when the maker cuts the neck mortise.

The measurement to nut is the nut where it meets the fingerboard.

Because all three above measurements are taken from the nut, (the horn of the head should be on the same plane as the intersection of the nut and the fingerboard as a rule), it becomes the cornerstone of neck construction. I have found it important to mark my nut line and score it with a scribe into the neck after the neck is rough-cut. In this way, this line becomes the reference for all other work to be done on the neck. The overall length at this point starts to become secondary.

Best wishes, I hope this helps, and reference works can indeed be frustrating when they don't jive with reality.
_________________
Randall Shenefelt

[famuswood]

Thanks for your reponse. I appreciate it very much.

The span between the head and the heel is what I was referring to. The Ossman neck is significantly longer. As a violinist, I know this must affect playability. My questions are, why would Ossman put out a book with this longer neck and do I really have a problem because this neck is this long? Is the Ossman neck within an acceptable range?

Thanks

[Andres Sender]

Since none of us has the Ossman book you may find your question becomes easier to answer specifically if you post the dimensions in question, as well as the stop length.

As to what motivated Ossman, the Amazon blurb for his new edition will give some idea: “the theory that only elite crafters can make wood instruments is debunked”.

[rs]

There are various opinions about the evolution of the modern neck.

It is universally certain that the neck we play today is not the same as the neck of the Cremonese makers. They generally made a neck that was approximately 1 cm shorter than the modern and was pitched at slightly less than the common angle of around 7 degrees found today. The heads were essentially the same, although the peg layout was just a shade different than the layout of modern makers. Essentially, when you view a Stradivari fiddle, the corpse is close to the same as the original, save for the bass bar, and the head is mostly the same. The neck, usually, but not always, is "aftermarket" from the neck block to nut, and the new neck can be seen grafted into the head, usually by a very skilled luthier at a later time. This is frequently accompanied by an aftermarket ebony button cap. The longer neck began to take shape in the industry sometime near the end of the 18th century and was completed sometime in the beginning of the 19th century. This chronology is usually fairly conjectural.

Most of the difference in length was noticed in the span from heel to head. Some luthiers in their updating efforts did not change the neck in the manner as noted above. They, instead, spliced the neck somewhere in the center with a piece adequate to give length, left the original heel in place, and simply repitched the angle by most commonly sacrificing the original neck block.

All of this shows how some extant violins can vary in measurement from modern "standards".

The best way to avoid deviation when building a fiddle, is to start from the nut to determine every other cut.

The nut to bridge stop measurement should be 329 mm, plus or minus 1 mm. This means the open string should measure 328-330 mm. To accomplish this, the distance from the nut to the base of the bridge at its back will be 325 mm. It is shorter than the open string measurement because of the 7 degree pitch of the neck.

Once the top plate is made and the sound holes cut and notched, the placement location of the bridge is already determined. The distance from the back of the bridge, or lowest sound hole notch, is subtracted from the 325 mm length. If, for example, this distance from top edge of the belly plate to the back of the bridge is 195 mm, then the nut when set should be 130 mm from the top edge of the belly plate to nut.

The horn of the head should be cut to be on the same plane as this nut line. Then the heel is shaped to open a span between the head and heel of a distance of 112 mm. This is equal to 4.4". This is generally the accepted measurement. I usually make this the minimum span and try to get it closer to 4.5".

Best wishes
_________________
Randall Shenefelt

[Andres Sender]

[rs]

Andres, the method you describe is a style of the neck-splice approach mentioned earlier. The extremes of the techniques selected are generally the wholesale replacement of the neck as one extreme, versus the less intrusive neck-splice be it at the head or otherwise. Of course there is a whole host of varieties in between these two.

As for the length of the neck, as there exist so few specimens from antiquity, there is little chance that the issue of original neck length may fully be established at any time soon, or if there ever WAS a "standard" to begin with during that time. 1 cm is at least safe to observe, and has been until now accepted on the minimum side of the debate. It may be very so that it was just over 1/2 cm as you note. These points become conjectural, but as always, you make a valid point .

As for the Harrison Strad it is an extremely fortunate example of restoration in that it retains its original neck. I seriously doubt of all the 600 or so extant Strads there exist ten that retain there original neck and the number is probably closer to five.

The purpose of my overview in the previous post was not to be rhetoric on neck construction of antiquity, rather to help a new one get a brief glimpse at why variations may be observed in so-called "reference works". If he understands this and then understands what he is trying to accomplish in making a fiddle, he can move forward and learn about the whole picture.

As for reading Michael Darnton's references, I could not agree more. His work, both in construction and writing is equal to any I have ever seen, past or present. Ever. I don't flatter. This is simply the reality.

Best wishes
_________________
Randall Shenefelt

[rs]

Sorry, Andres, I just proofread my post and it should read "1/2 cm". That is what I get for writing before coffee! I fixed it through edit.

Best wishes
_________________
Randall Shenefelt

[famuswood]

Andres . . .



This neck is longer than both my Roth violin and the Johnson/Courtnall template by quite a bit. It is, however, pretty close to the 329mm from nut to bridge mentioned in earlier posts.

[Andres Sender]

[rs]

Famuswood, in answer to your original question, this distance is a little long.

Best wishes
_________________
Randall Shenefelt

[famuswood]

Andres -
I'm working on a response to your requests for measurements and will repond shortly. The fingerboard edge thickness is about 3mm. I had a problem with the width of the fingerboard and had to go back and take some material off each side. At this writing I still have to detail the fingerboard to get it closer to the template. It is flatter than it is supposed to be because I wasn't paying enough attention to detail.

Thanks for your help

[famuswood]

RS - Thanks for your observation. I guess you mean the space under the fingerboard from the base of the head to the root, i.e. the 116mm measurement. You said "a little long" - In your opinion does that mean too long, or still within the range of acceptable?

[rs]

Hi Famuswood.

The space of 116 mm is just a little too much. Keep in mind that the heel still is rough-cut. When finished out, I imagine the space will be about 118 mm. Generally, this is a little long. It helps if you have a better grasp of the reason.

As violins have no frets, the fiddler must place his finger to form a stop. A stop is simply one end of a string to form a note. On open strings, the nut is a stop. When a fiddler drops his finger, this forms another stop. Where his finger lands determines the note he plays, not a fret. On a guitar, the guitarist simply needs to land his fingers in between frets. The frets form the stops, not the fingers.

Because it is crucial the fiddler finds this note on the first try, it helps him if he has landmarks. Fiddlers often use as the first position reference point the head under the nut. He feels this with his thumb, if need be, and can from this reference point find his fingering. This is a reference. In high position play, the fiddler uses the heel of the neck and the top of the fiddle itself. These become his reference as he reaches his fingers to find his notes.

As a rule, if the heel is too close to the nut, therefore, his tendency will be to play flat in high position as his experience is that his fingers are on the mark, but the reality is he needs to stretch a bit more. If the heel is too far from the nut, he will tend to play sharp for the same reason. Naturally, the violinist can acclimate to these variances, but the truth is, he won't like it as it is different than his experience suggests. Too short a span is worse for the fiddler, but easier to correct for the maker (before varnishing, naturally). Musicians will generally tolerate sharp better than flat. This is most likely why the pitch of the A keeps getting raised about every other generation or so. But, the bottom line is, it is alot to ask a musician to simply adapt. It is kind of like architects advising to plant vines. And with so many fiddles to choose from, a violinist probably won't bother.

For this reason, generally it is best to go with a "standard" for the benefit of the musician.

The standard spread between the head and the heel is 112 mm, generally. (I just checked Stroebel's reference and he shows 112). 112 mm is about 4.4". I have found that it is generally liked better by musicians if this is opened up slightly to about 114 mm. This way, the reach still feels about the same to the fiddler, but is just a faint shade ("faint shade", definitely a Midwest expression!) easier reach to very high play for the fourth finger on the E string. 116-118 appears to just overdo it.

I have never found any complaints about 114 mm. One thing I have learned, if there is anything that the musicians are pickiest about, it is the feel of the neck.

It is possible that others have found differing views than these from musicians. And it simply may be the company I keep! These are what I have found, and why I suggest this distance is too long.

Best wishes and hope this helps.
_________________
Randall Shenefelt

[famuswood]

RS - Thanks for your detailed explanation. I am a violinist and know exactly what you mean about the feel of the neck. Moving from first position to third would be a significant adjustment for a violinist if playing a neck that was a centimeter plus in additional length. That is what prompted this topic and question. I was quite dismayed to find that the Ossman template was so much longer than my violin, and the template in the Johnson/Courtnall book.

What a wonderful journey it is to learn more and more about violin making! It's like reading a good book with interesting discoveries in each new chapter. My first violin will, needless to say, be significantly flawed, but I am enjoying the process of learning as I go along.

Thanks to you and all the wonderful contributors in this forum, I'm sure my next effort will begin with my eyes opened much wider!