View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
JWH Member
Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Posts: 72
|
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:03 pm Post subject: Stradivari arching |
|
|
Presently, I've been using the Milanollo pattern. In fact, it's the only pattern of Stradivari I have used (with some modification). Not having seen other patterns, how well does the Milanollo design fit Strad's overall arching system through the years even though this model came late in his career? Wherein, other models having varying heights of top plate and back, as well as overall size, does Strad hold to the same arches by drawing them in on longer dimensions and spreading them out over shorter dimensions? Put another way, does Strad keep to a consistent arch, but where body length, width, and height vary, perhaps, he adds more scoop before he starts the arch in longer and wider models and vise versa? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Michael Darnton Moderator
Joined: 23 Mar 2007 Posts: 1281 Location: Chicago
|
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 9:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I haven't looked at the poster for a while, but what I remember is that the Milanollo is relatively flat--low. Stradivari violins have a lot of different arches--remember that he worked for about 70 years, so you'd expect a certain amount of variability. Mostly his archings can be divided into periods, with strange interludes. One gets the idea that he would maybe work for a while--like 10-15 years--one way, and then get an urge to try something different, and vibrate around a bit before settling on something new again.
Most Cremonese crossarchings seem to fit curtate cycloid curves quite closely, but there are a lot of different ways to integrate those curves into a violin, and make them look different.
Here's some computer software to set you out on this path:
http://www.cgl.uwaterloo.ca/~smann/ccycloid/
Also, check some of the stuff on my webpage, here:
http://darntonviolins.com/violinmaking.php
in the laser scanning section. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Andres Sender Super Member
Joined: 23 Mar 2007 Posts: 275 Location: N. CA
|
Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[re-re edit]
I found I could get pretty good matches for the top arching using cycloids, except that I had to fudge things a bit for the c-bout.
At that point it becomes an exercise in deciding how to back out any distortion, and ultimately what aspects of the cycloid are most important to preserve vs. non-cycloid elements which might have been original.
The arching is actually fairly high on the Milanollo. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
JWH Member
Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Posts: 72
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Andres Sender Super Member
Joined: 23 Mar 2007 Posts: 275 Location: N. CA
|
Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
FWIW JWH, you have transformed the character of the top arch into something non-Milanollo by (among other things) adding a lot of fullness and eliminating recurve areas in the outer bouts.
Milanollo lower bout archings:
http://img31.exs.cx/img31/5352/straddgstainlbweb6xl.jpg |
|
Back to top |
|
|
JWH Member
Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Posts: 72
|
Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 5:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
"WIW JWH, you have transformed the character of the top arch into something non-Milanollo by (among other things) adding a lot of fullness and eliminating recurve areas in the outer bouts."
I know and I shouldn't be doing every thing by eye. Maybe, I'll make some templates the next time. I am getting great sound in the high registers, but no doubt the bass quality is suffering from this configuration. Thanks |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|