Violin Forum/Message Board

[Michael Darnton]

There's way too much "That sounds like a good idea, so I will believe that it is true" in the violin making world.
_________________
new blog at my site! http://darntonviolins.com/blog
my work sites: http://darntonviolins.com and http://darntonhersh.com

[John Cadd]

Interesting , whether we agree or disagree . Tealeaves make pretty patterns so we both agree to believe that ? Sorted .

[Michael Darnton]

The problem with violin acoustics is that there are many theories, very few actual tests. In general, the theory with the best publicity department often wins in the popular opinion. I am often struck by the comments of respected makers who will say things about how various aspects of adjustment and making affect sound without having actually done tests to affirm the accuracy of their predictions.
_________________
new blog at my site! http://darntonviolins.com/blog
my work sites: http://darntonviolins.com and http://darntonhersh.com

[John Cadd]

I was interested to see how you would react to the Ferdinand Gagliano and it`s thick plates . Are these thicker plates a rarity ? Have violin adjusters ever added wood and left the original as it was apart from that ? A written apology inside the instrument in case the change was wrong .That would be a refreshing change .

[Michael Darnton]

Graduation is an interesting and complex topic. Though many makers now simply use some form of Strad grads, in the past thicknesses could vary wildly. I have seen original top grads of 2 mm and of 7 mm on old violins. How well those work depends on the arching.

In general it's safer to work thinner--if a top is thin enough it can move somewhat regardless of what the arch shape is. Inappropriately-thin grads have their own tonal problems, but those are often not as immediately identifiable, especially by inexperienced purchasers (read "beginners"). On the other hand, thick grads with the appropriate arching can give huge benefits--witness for instance Paganini's "Cannone" del Gesu and a number of other last-period del Gesus with thicknesses as much as 50% greater than Strads have.

You could interpret this as that thick wood kills (this is the conclusion that a lot of makers come to); you could equally validly interpret it as bad arching kills. The first conclusion is easier to make because more people have calipers than have eyes for archings. The second idea requires more of the maker in the way of both experience, understanding, and willingness to fail but one could argue that the payoff is greater.

Obviously I couldn't say anything about a particular instrument without knowing how well it works.
_________________
new blog at my site! http://darntonviolins.com/blog
my work sites: http://darntonviolins.com and http://darntonhersh.com

[Mike Shuman]

[John Cadd]

In the Maestronet Forum one sound engineer talking about thicknessing etc suggested that sound travels faster in thinner wood. Nobody on that topic contradicted that so is there any truth in it ?

[Michael Darnton]

Personally, I believe their entire model is wrong, based on faulty underlying assumptions,, and that the issue is irrelevant. I am sure they would assure you that they are correct, however.

When reading that kind of thing always remember that the originators of the instrument did not use that type of science and had no access to those concepts, so they had to see it from some different angle.

Think of it this way: Google Maps may give you the shortest path, via a large highway, but the trip on the old back roads will be profoundly and unavoidably different. Unintended consequences.
_________________
new blog at my site! http://darntonviolins.com/blog
my work sites: http://darntonviolins.com and http://darntonhersh.com

[John Cadd]

So are the violins you have made as good as Del Gesu`s ? If you dismiss all the other makers there must be a reason in your mind. Do you think their archings are all wrong ? Archings are easy to copy . How can they get them wrong with computer aided machinery ? X Ray machines are used to exactly copy the best violins. They might not waste their time copying a pile of school violins .
The CAD machines will do better than makers proud of their artistic abilities . Maybe understanding violins is less use than making exact copies . If it sounds better --who cares ?

[Michael Darnton]

Ha! It's not necessary to be the world's best maker to understand that for the past 300 years the most appreciated violins and makers have been those who've done the best job or precisely copying what they see in Strads and del Gesus, starting in some cases during those makers' own lifetimes. Every national school quickly corrected itself as those principles spread and became understood in any way. I don't believe there are more than a handful of makers who have succeeded outside of those parameters.

That's a fundamental understanding through the business, which is why people attempt to do it. However, doing the best job on this has always been reserved to those with the best access to those classical instruments combined with the best eyes, neither of which is common and which combined are the path to accurate copies. And these people have failed to rise to their possibility almost directly in proportion to believing that they can leave those models and do better with their own ideas. The evidence there is the violins that they made that are the most accurate copies. There are subtle nuances to arching, for instance, which can't be verbally communicated and are quickly forgotten if not solidly internalized. Generally the verbal descriptions that exist are too broad, and not very good. I like templates because if they are accurate they are the best method of recording these nuances.

I completely agree with you that computer replication is the best option we have to do the job with the least understanding, and began researching that early on in the history of computerized manufacturing*. The main flaw with this plan is that a certain amount of handwork is required for finishing and some features that I consider the most essential are the most easily erased by careless handwork, and this is the problem for normal makers as well: first you have to see it, and then you have to do it. Realistically, being a skilled computer worker has to distract energy and time from being the best observer. The hump in this is that mostly people see what they expect or have been taught to see, and getting them to realize that their observation is inaccurate can be difficult. This is why I loved teaching beginners with no preconceptions.

You are welcome to name me a single engineer who has become a famous maker with a broad client base working on a strict engineering basis while ignoring traditional principles. I'm all ears on that.


* I went to some of the big industrial computer shows in the early 80s asking about this and was assured that though the programs of the time wouldn't do what I wanted, it would soon happen, and it did. At one point I started seriously working in this direction, but "aged out". I'm not hostile to these ideas at all, though.
_________________
new blog at my site! http://darntonviolins.com/blog
my work sites: http://darntonviolins.com and http://darntonhersh.com

[John Cadd]

I watched the video about the copies made of the Betts violin .It was such a badly presented thing .But apart from not knowing which was the original Betts violin for most of the video , the music played did not impress at all. Two violins played together is just not the way to hear a violin if you want to focus on that rather than the music . I was not surprised the comments section was closed . But eventually from the car crash video the violins sounded similar . Not very good though .For some reason I was concentrating on the lady`s bow hand and the lack of flexibility in the wrist when changing from up bow to down bow . The peculiar scale played was just awful .
I was expecting a laser accurate copy violin from X-ray data but it was all done by hand . Even the wood density target was missed . Very poor .

[Michael Darnton]

I had not seen that before. I listened just for a while. That's a hard situation to choose a violin. For most listeners the difference between good and great violins is tiny if at all, especially in this type of situation, listening without a toolbox of tricks for telling differences. And you are right, having them play at the same time didn't help at all. I wonder how different it was in person.
_________________
new blog at my site! http://darntonviolins.com/blog
my work sites: http://darntonviolins.com and http://darntonhersh.com

[John Cadd]

Yes the intention of the experiment was good . All credit to the makers for wanting to satisfy their curiosity. To scratch a permanent itch . I was disappointed that the forensic purity of getting the thing exactly the same (physically ) was substituted for pretty much careful hand making with some personal preference intervening .That`s one impression I came away with . The vagueness at the end came instead of some hope or proof that they had definitely learned something valuable . Maybe they have . Maybe they can try it all in reverse with a very bad violin and get the exact result for that too . That`s what they call a thought experiment . For a great violin you also need a great bow and a great player . I can imagine media men writing a list of changes before they make a similar video . Now I recall the collector who kept famous violins under his bed and squashed some . We can`t repeat that experiment .

[John Cadd]

So far on this forum there have been no ways (suggested ) to untangle the puzzle of the wobbly thickness pictures in violins . This is nothing to do with weight or arching though . I looked at one picture of a Domenico Montagnana and noticed that if you draw a line from the bridge area outwards to the edge of the plate the thickness tapers down until just near the edges where it increases slightly , just to maintain sufficient strength for the edge joint. That does not sound much like a startling design idea (especially coming from a single violin ) .But anyway , if you keep drawing those lines from the bridge area you see it can form all sorts of wobbly shapes and still maintain that tapering principle. A few small areas can be seen where the thickness increases in a lumpy way or decreases as if the gouge has gone a bit too deep .
That is not any kind of a theory (so you can put the rope away ) but maybe the exactitude we hope for is not necessary . Maybe a more relaxed attitude works just as well .
I believe Montagnana was an outstanding maker . One violin and from a maker I know nothing about . Can these very common wobbly shapes in so many great violins really have no effect at all on the way a violin works ?

[Michael Darnton]

You're addressing a good issue: how could it be possible to replicate the results the classical makers achieved by doing things they didn't do and not doing the things they did do? One thing they didn't do is graduate with modern calipers, trying to make everything within 1/10 mm, as modern makers do.

I started working to "lesser" precision in this area a while ago. I can't say that it made a noticeable difference in anything, but who knows: it might make a difference if someday I do something else different and there's a synergy that my current method hasn't revealed, so I will continue to do it. Or maybe there's a pattern to it that needs to be figured out.

But I do think you are right: it's important to figure out what they really did do, not accepting some whitewashed modern idea of it. Making a top a uniform 2.7 mm thick because that's what Stradivari's long-term average was is not the same thing as doing what Stradivari actually did!
_________________
new blog at my site! http://darntonviolins.com/blog
my work sites: http://darntonviolins.com and http://darntonhersh.com