View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
KenN Member
Joined: 27 Mar 2007 Posts: 89 Location: Goodrich, MI
|
Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:20 pm Post subject: Modern or baroque bass bar |
|
|
I took my violin to show my daughter in Arizona. I didn't think to loosen the string tension when leaving from Michigan. Luckily the stings completely fell off and didn't tighten and break something! Anyway I decided when I got home to try to adjust the fingerboard to try to make the fingered notes (especially on the E string) as strong as the open notes.
Then I went ahead and pulled the top off to see what kind of tuning it has, since I put the purfling in after it was glued together.
Well now to the question: It's a Stainer pattern and I was wondering if the bass bar is a baroque bar or a modern one. The length is about 265mm and the height in thelower bouts is about 5 mm, the uppers a little more. The high spot by the bridge is about 16mm and it drops off rapidly from there to the lower bout and a little more gradually to the upper. It sticks up above the plate bottom from about the bottom of the upper eyes to just below the bottom of the ff holes.
I just tuned it (using the info from the daleco site) and it was just a hair tall in the bouts. I had no idea how to do it before, just followed the plan since the bass bar pattern was given. I don't know if the daleco stuff is the way anyone else does it, but at least it is something to go by.
It looks a lot different than the one shown in the Johnson/Courtnall book. Would that be more of a modern bb or like an original Stainer?
Just got DSL and hope this resolves my posting issues. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Andres Sender Super Member
Joined: 23 Mar 2007 Posts: 275 Location: N. CA
|
Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 1:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Baroque bars are less long and not very tall--in the area of 6 to 9 mm in the middle. A modern bar is typically around 11-12. Your bar sounds VERY tall. It might also be a bit short depending on the size of the instrument.
Better to follow J & C than some website IMO. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
KenN Member
Joined: 27 Mar 2007 Posts: 89 Location: Goodrich, MI
|
Posted: Sun Jul 15, 2007 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was just following the plan I had. It gave a full size pattern for the bass bar. The instrument is pretty much like the plan,359 long and about 15.8 on the arches, and a little narrow at 160, 98, 198. I did change the thickness pattern on the back considerably because it wouldn't flex at all!
The only thing I'd llike to change is the way the E string sounds when it is fingered. The open E is strong. The other strings are not nearly as bad in that respect, and the low end is very strong and rich (to me anyway).
I know my fingerboard is kinda thin, about 4-4.5 near the nut and about 3-3.5 from the end of the neck on. Could that have a big effect on the E string? The soundpost was about 2-3mm inside the bridge foot and about 6mm below it (because I moved the bridge up from the f hole notch to get a 1:3 ratio on the string afterlength, then didn't move the soundpost).
Any suggestions on how to even out the E string? Maybe Dominants aren't the best match for it? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mat Roop Senior Member
Joined: 24 Mar 2007 Posts: 911 Location: Wyoming Ontario
|
Posted: Mon Jul 16, 2007 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ken, What is the 1:3 ratio? I have not heard of it. The normal ratio I am familiar with is 2:3 neck stop to body stop and the norm for the afterlength is 57mm.
Your best chance is with ajusting the post...or bridge...When you say the post is 2-3 mm in from the bridge... you mean towards the bass bar? If so I would move the post out away from the bass bar 1 to 2 mm or maybe even 3 if necessary so that the post edge is in line with the edge of the bridge. 6mm behind the bridge is a little too far... try 3mm. I even had a case where right under the bridge worked well!
Cheers, Mat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
KenN Member
Joined: 27 Mar 2007 Posts: 89 Location: Goodrich, MI
|
Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 6:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The 1:3 ratio is for the after length. I had the string length set at about 330, the length from the bridge to the saddle, (don't know the term for that), at 165. And the after length was 1/3 of that, about 55. If you pluck the E and then the afterlength of the A they should be the same, (but 2 octaves apart). The rest of the strings are the same way. With 1:2 and 1:3 ratios everywhere it seems like you could get some extra synergy from it. Maybe the E string doesn't benefit from that set-up because of the fine tuner.
Yes I meant toward the bass bar. I thought of moving the post out to the edge or further, that is supposed to add strength to the E string isn't it?
When I set it back up I'll move it closer to where I set the bridge and not from the nicks. Maybe it will still fit good, moving up and over the length may stay the same. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
KenN Member
Joined: 27 Mar 2007 Posts: 89 Location: Goodrich, MI
|
Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I forgot about the bridge. What kind of adjustments to the bridge would enhance the E string? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Andres Sender Super Member
Joined: 23 Mar 2007 Posts: 275 Location: N. CA
|
Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2007 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The best adjustment to the bridge or soundpost at this point would be to:
reshape the bass bar so it matches professional practice.
Otherwise you'll make all those adjustments trying to make up for the bass bar, and then when you're done, the lightbulb will go on, and you'll:
reshape the bass bar so it matches professional practice.
...and the other adjustments will need to be done over. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
jessupe goldastini Member
Joined: 25 Apr 2007 Posts: 169 Location: sana' rafaela'
|
Posted: Sun Jul 22, 2007 2:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
some adjustments and bridge theorys....from the kook...
first after legnth{behind the bridge} tonality must be in line with the upper string tuning....this i learned from a guy named richard hendricks....an amazing player and very sucessful dealer...
anyhoo....if you do not want to rip the top off....and a re satified with the sound overall....except the e....
since bridges are cheap you may try some of these suggestions
it really basically gets into hacking up the bridge in various areas...
when we have our bridge feet in perfect contact....the transfer of sound is steady and imediate...the thicker the ankle of the feet is the more the sound is transfered in a strong manner....on the e side you may try thinning down the ankle{the area right above the foot} ofcourse this is a tech used for "quick fit" bridges....as the feet{ankles bend} will conform to the plate easyier....however by doing so in an nonsymetrical way....it may be enough to tame the e by weakening the response time....actually on all the cut outs on the e side you may scoop and shave, by doing this you'll diminsh the amount of wood and therefore slightly reduce the transer stregnth....imuo |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mat Roop Senior Member
Joined: 24 Mar 2007 Posts: 911 Location: Wyoming Ontario
|
Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 12:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
KenN wrote: | I forgot about the bridge. What kind of adjustments to the bridge would enhance the E string? |
Ken, Ajusting the bridge is quite a sophisticated matter....check out the reference section on this site... particularly "Bridging the Divide" and "Fitting a fine Bridge"
http://www.violinbridges.co.uk/ref.php
Good luck, Mat |
|
Back to top |
|
|
KenN Member
Joined: 27 Mar 2007 Posts: 89 Location: Goodrich, MI
|
Posted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I already had the top off so I cut the bass bar back by about 2/3 to 1/2 of what it was. I kept the basic shape the same. That was easy enough to do. Now I'll glue it back up and maybe put a new fingerboard on it. The open E string itself didn't sound bad, but as soon as you put a finger on it to raise the pitch it just killed the sound. The other strings didn't do that, at least not to anyway near that degree. It was almost like all of the overones disappered. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|