waking-up old violins
Ruthann Biel
in your various experiences, how long does it take to "wake up" an old
violin? I would guess that it depends on the violin, but am wondering
about the range of time.
--
Ruthann Biel | Mother, Unschooler, Stitcher, Music Lover.
r...@woozle.Emp.Unify.Com |-------------------------------------------
+1 916 381 4205 | Sacramento, California USA
PeteSchug
r...@woozle.emp.unify.com wrote on 1/19/03 8:44 PM:
> We have an old violin that has not been played in years. I am wondering,
> in your various experiences, how long does it take to "wake up" an old
> violin? I would guess that it depends on the violin, but am wondering
> about the range of time.
My own experience is limited to two violins, one rebuilt and the other new.
The first I had for eighteen years after it was rebuilt and refinished. The
top had been off, though there were no cracks. For one reason or another it
languished in my closet for eighteen years and when I started lessons and
began playing (at least a couple of hours a day) I could hear an improvement
which I attributed to my constant practice. I was right, but it was the
violin that was improving and not me. It was first noticable on the open G
string, then the A on the G string got stronger and so on. The violin had a
flabby sounding D string and after a few months that improved markedly. That
was my first experience at a violin breaking in. Or maybe opening up is a
better description since the violin was not new.
It continued to improve for at least six months, but the most noticeable
improvement came when the G string started to get louder, probably six weeks
after I began scale exercises and stuff like that. (How else would I have
noticed which notes were getting better?)
I made my present violin myself, and it was better than the first right off
the bat. Never the less it too improved, but the mind blowing thing came
maybe six months later when I went to visit a friend who lives in a rural
area at the far end of a private road. I had the pleasure of playing out of
doors as loud as I wanted. (I live in an apartment and could only play loud
on rare occasions.) After a couple of hours of loud outdoor practice my
violin definitly sounded more resonant while playing quietly indoors that
evening.
I seldom play my first violin anymore, but when I do it sounds thin and
whiney. I think some of that sound is from lack of playing.
I have a third violin that is pretty mediocre but it has a pleasant, woody,
boxy sound that is fine for fiddle tunes. It never seems to change, but then
again, I don't play it a whole lot.
Pete
--
Check out my fiddle making site
http://home.att.net/~PeteSchug/
Tho X. Bui
Ruthann Biel wrote:
>
> We have an old violin that has not been played in years. I am wondering,
> in your various experiences, how long does it take to "wake up" an old
> violin? I would guess that it depends on the violin, but am wondering
> about the range of time.
>
Conventional wisdom aside, my personal experience is that I've yet to
meet a violin that needs to "broken" in. Most of the time, by putting
in broken-in string with fresh rosin, there is not enough changes for me
to notice after a day as the string settles in. And even if there is a
sound change, positive or negative, I probably won't remember what it
sounded like a week ago, much less months as some people have suggested.
Perhaps those with more quantitative hearing can do a better job at
detecting it ("It's definitely 3.25% better sounding than it was in October").
I do find that as my violins sit around, the rosin on the string seems
to get oxidized. A quick clean job with fresh rosin seems to quickly
bring it back to order.
Tho
PeteSchug
No, I do not have calibrated eardrums, the first fiddle improved a semitone
at a time starting at the low G. The progress up the string was very
obvious. Since the fiddle had a very weak sounding D string I was hoping
that I would get an improvement there. When C# began to improve it got very
loud and hard to control. Like one wild note! I was playing two octave minor
pents in all keys a couple of times a day, and I definitly knew when the
improvement got to C#! As the D string improved the wild C# started to
settle in and behave itself. You might say the resonance peak broadened out.
What exactly happens I don't know, but it was not a matter of "When I make a
bow stroke of 9 inches a second with 4.27 ounces of pressure on the string
the volume approaches zz decibles." It was more like the bottom notes got
better one at a time and the change went as far as the flabby sounding D
string. The E always sounded squeeky in the beginning and also got better,
but that may have been all that practice.
You don't need a great memory or calibrated ears to know something is going
on when it happens like that.
Pete
in article 3E2B86D8...@earthlink.net, Tho X. Bui at
bla...@earthlink.net wrote on 1/20/03 12:18 AM:
bur...@yahoo.com
of service. That is of course barring any unfortunate accidents such
as cracks....etc To my ear great fiddles are great from the day they
are first strung.. sure they may get better over time but all the time
in the world will not help a poor quality, poor sounding instrument.
To paraphrase George Gruhn international string instrument authority
"who has the time to wait for them to "mature"? I certainly dont have
15 or 20 years. YMMV
Tom .
PeteSchug
bur...@yahoo.com wrote on 1/20/03 12:02 PM:
> IMHO, a good fiddle is going to sound good no matter how long its out
> of service. That is of course barring any unfortunate accidents such
> as cracks....etc To my ear great fiddles are great from the day they
> are first strung.. sure they may get better over time but all the time
> in the world will not help a poor quality, poor sounding instrument.
> To paraphrase George Gruhn international string instrument authority
> "who has the time to wait for them to "mature"? I certainly dont have
> 15 or 20 years. YMMV
>
> Tom .
Nothing to disagree with here but:
Please recall that del Gesu's violins were considered second rate compared
to Stradivari until about sixty years after his death! Most of them were
graduated pretty thick and probably took a while to loosen up. Today many
consider them generally superior to Stradivari as performance instruments. I
am not in a position to judge, but I'll take the word of those who spend
fortunes on fiddles and manage to ultimately profit either as performers,
collectors or dealers.
Yes, a good violin starts out good, and seldom will a mediocre one improve
to the point of being as good as a good new fiddle, but once you have
experienced the gradual improvement of a violin while it plays in, you never
forget the experience. That fiddle had a dead D string and after the C#
wildness tamed down the D string was pretty good.
My second fiddle was way better from day one, but even that improved as
previously mentioned. I also believe, in my gut, that even a couple of weeks
of not playing affects the sound, but that is not something that you can
measure, but instead is in the range of what you can feel and compensate for
by working harder. Which leads to the interesting question of how hard does
someone like Itzaak Perlman or Ann Sophie Mutter drive a fiddle? Also, how
hard to they have to drive their ancient treasures compaired to how hard we
have to play to be heard in a group setting?
My teacher, who is no slouch when it comes to driving a fiddle never lets
anyone play her good instrument. One day someone (apparently really good)
picked up her fiddle uninvited and proceeded to really wring it out. She was
too polite to let her feelings be known, but she commented that after this
person was done she could feel an improvement in how it played.
I have a two record set of LP's of Frans Brüggen playing 17 historic
recorders. These were borrowed from museums around europe and he really
played them. One or two broke as a result of moisture after a couple of
hundred years of not being played. One particular one he mention was a
Bressan Alto which he said had never been played. His comment was not based
on the history of the instrument, but the fact that it felt new! In those
days Frans Brüggen was the leading viruoso on the recorder. Today he is
mostly known as a conductor of a period instrument orchestra.
In Boeme's (sp?) book on the flute (he is the guy who designed the modern
metal flute) he comments that allowing a beginner to play a flute will ruin
it for all time. It has to be broken in by someone who can play in pitch. He
was writing about metal flutes.
It it mythology or fact. I don't know. I do know that my first fiddle broke
in very noticeably.
Pete
Kenneth
>...but I'll take the word of those who spend
>fortunes on fiddles
Howdy,
Why...? Might they not be likely to exhibit some bias?
In "blind" competitions, it is usually recently made American and
Japanese violins that win. Those are in the 10-15K range.
All the best,
--
Kenneth
If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
PeteSchug
so...@SPAMLESSsoleassociates.com wrote on 1/20/03 7:03 PM:
> On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 19:07:43 GMT, PeteSchug <Pete...@att.net> wrote:
>
>
>> ...but I'll take the word of those who spend
>> fortunes on fiddles
>
> Howdy,
>
> Why...? Might they not be likely to exhibit some bias?
>
> In "blind" competitions, it is usually recently made American and
> Japanese violins that win. Those are in the 10-15K range.
>
> All the best,
When a guy like Perlman mentions to Menuhin that he likes a particular
fiddle and ten or fifteen years later Menuhin offers it to Perlman and he
buys it and uses it to perform on I don't take that to be bias. I think the
man knows what he wants and can tell the difference as a player and as a
performer. (I have a video clip of Perlman telling the story.)
If it were me, I probably couldn't tell the difference. When Perlman or some
other giant of the violin gets on stage they don't extol the virtues of
their fiddle, they just play. Nobody knows what they are actually playing,
so why do they spend a fortune on a particular instrument rather than saving
a few million dollars and buying a fine modern instrument?
I have to add that a blind test should involve performers choosing an
instrument they like by playing it blindfolded. Most "blind" tests involve
someone behind a curtain playing for an audience. The audience may or may
not be composed of first rank violinists.
Bottom line for me is: I'll take the word of a world class performer when he
puts his money where his mouth is. For myself I will never need more than
I've got, but I sure would like to try a few really good fiddles. Come to
think of it, at the last Christies auction in NYC one of the fiddles we used
to test a bow on turned out to be listed as $25,000 expected selling price.
It sounded pretty good, but I'd still think more than twice at spending that
kind of money even if I had it. There were better fiddles there, but we were
too unsure of ourselves to ask to try any of the ones that had attendants
handing them over and taking them back. (I didn't eve look at the expected
prices!)
Pete
Michael Alvarez
"Kenneth" <so...@SPAMLESSsoleassociates.com> wrote in message
news:9e3p2vcmaiabb9sug...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 19:07:43 GMT, PeteSchug <Pete...@att.net> wrote:
>
>
> >...but I'll take the word of those who spend
> >fortunes on fiddles
>
> Howdy,
>
> Why...? Might they not be likely to exhibit some bias?
>
> In "blind" competitions, it is usually recently made American and
> Japanese violins that win. Those are in the 10-15K range.
>
> All the best,
> --
> Kenneth
Wow. That *IS* a fortune to me. If I spend that kind of cash on an item, I
would expect to be driving it!
: )
Mike
Roland Hutchinson
Yes, but for how long? And how much would you get back if you sold it?
Also, a good fiddle is almost immeasurably cheaper to insure than a car
of the same value!
--
Roland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food.
NB mail to my_sp...@eudoramail.com is heavily filtered to
remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it.
J. Teske
responsiveness in the hands of the violinist. They are said to "speak"
easier.
My own violin...a 39 year old violin by noted American maker has
become more playable over the years. Some say it sounds like a big
name Italian violin (that is perhaps optimistic, but I do use it for
solo recitals). I often felt I had to work harder at playing it when
I got it new in 1964. Then again, maybe my technique is better now
than it was then.
I have played both a Strad and a Guarneri and they sure are easy to
play. You feel as though there is no limit to the sound you can
produce on either the loud or soft end of the scale. I might be hard
pressed though to tell the difference or to tell if those instruments
sound better than the best of the comtemporary instruments. While
individual instruments will, of course sound different, it is a very
subjective thing to say one is better or worse from an auditors point
of view.
Jon Teske
Kenneth
<mik...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>Wow. That *IS* a fortune to me.
Hello again,
I was not suggesting otherwise. My comment was based on the
*comparison.*
Compared to hundreds of thousands, or even millions, 10-15K is pocket
change.
All the best,
--
Kenneth
If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."
Tien Dao
Thanks,
TD
"Kenneth" <so...@SPAMLESSsoleassociates.com> wrote in message
news:9e3p2vcmaiabb9sug...@4ax.com...
Carl Witthoft
In fact, this is true of most instruments: quality leads to "easier" playing
and better voicing. Us reed players (OK, I'm an ex-reed :-) ) know all too
painfully the difference between a good reed and a crappy one, but listeners
regularly say they hear little or no difference in the end result. It's just
how hard we have to work to get there.
In an epistle labelled <78ip2v8um09supt91...@4ax.com>,
J. Teske <jdt...@comcast.net> held forth the proposition that:
> In many cases, the difference between big name violins is the
> responsiveness in the hands of the violinist. They are said to "speak"
> easier.
>
> My own violin...a 39 year old violin by noted American maker has
> become more playable over the years. Some say it sounds like a big
> name Italian violin (that is perhaps optimistic, but I do use it for
> solo recitals). I often felt I had to work harder at playing it when
> I got it new in 1964. Then again, maybe my technique is better now
> than it was then.
>
> I have played both a Strad and a Guarneri and they sure are easy to
> play. You feel as though there is no limit to the sound you can
> produce on either the loud or soft end of the scale. I might be hard
> pressed though to tell the difference or to tell if those instruments
> sound better than the best of the comtemporary instruments. While
> individual instruments will, of course sound different, it is a very
> subjective thing to say one is better or worse from an auditors point
> of view.
--
Carl Witthoft c...@witthoft.com http://www.witthoft.com
Kenneth
wrote:
>Can you give me some references for these blind studies?
>
>Thanks,
>
>TD
Hello again,
In the sense of pointing to sources, with regret, I cannot...
About fifteen years ago I started reading about all this when I became
interested in purchasing a good fiddle. In my reading at the time, I
came upon these issues frequently.
If I can spot my old file of info, I will pass along what I have. I am
also happy to try a bit of Googling.
But either way, there are certainly others here much more
knowledgeable than I.
Kenneth
wrote:
>Can you give me some references for these blind studies?
>
>Thanks,
>
>TD
You might want to check:
http://www.fritz-reuter.com/books/rin031.htm
http://www.primoviolins.com/historyviolin.htm
http://www.schleske.de/08veroeffentlichungen/CAS%20Artikel%20Empirical%20Tools%20Part%20I.pdf
HTH,
Tien Dao
TD
"Kenneth" <so...@SPAMLESSsoleassociates.com> wrote in message
news:m70s2vk2jmhoe79i8...@4ax.com...
RWL
wrote:
>
>
>Ruthann Biel wrote:
>>
>> We have an old violin that has not been played in years. I am wondering,
>> in your various experiences, how long does it take to "wake up" an old
>> violin? I would guess that it depends on the violin, but am wondering
>> about the range of time.
I don't think anyone can give a specific time. Many are skeptical
that it occurs. I was one of them until I had the experience myself.
My instrument at the time was an 80 year old Wurlitzer that hadn't
been played for approximately 20-25 years at least. The first two
years I used it, it was muted and had a mediocre sound. One summer I
was trying to learn a piece with multiple chords (Mozart's "Der
Spiegel") and doing an awful job - but the violin was being played
more vigorously than it had been for years due to my struggling with
that piece. After practicing Der 'Speigel, the other things I was
practicing sounded good. At first, I thought it was just that
anything sounded better than my playing of Der Spiegel. As I rotated
the order of the pieces as I practiced over a few weeks, I noticed
that the improvement always came after playing the Mozart piece. In
the beginning, the improvement was gone by the next day. Over a few
weeks, the violin improved permanently, and the tone didn't change
noticeably after playing Der Spiegel. After I was pretty sure the
violin had changed, I had my son play it, and asked him what he
thought. He independantly noticed the improvement and made a comment
along the lines that previously he really disliked playing my
instrument in comparison to his, but now it sounded decent.
A German by the name of von Reumont developed a system of mechanical
vibration of stringed instruments which he called "vibration
dedamping". The method is akin to vibrational stress relief of welded
steel members. Henry Strobel and Lothar Tews have published a
translation of von Reumont's work, and it's an interesting read. The
changes in the instruments are measurable.
RWL
******* Remove NOSPAM to reply *******
Jim Thompson
but they do have a few things in common.
http://www.acousticguitar.com/Gear/advice/vibration.shtml. I'm clearly no
expert but there is something appealing about the idea that changes occur at
the cellular level as the wood flexes at the nodes.
I was thinking of getting one of these little 7500 watt gems but don't think
my wife would appreciate it. Nor would my neighbors, come to think of it :).
Jim
"PeteSchug" <Pete...@att.net> wrote in message
news:BA51B320.37FB%Pete...@att.net...
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.443 / Virus Database: 248 - Release Date: 1/10/03
PeteSchug
jimt...@hotmail.com wrote on 1/26/03 2:50 PM:
> I stumbled on this article a few days ago. It's about guitars, not fiddles
> but they do have a few things in common.
> http://www.acousticguitar.com/Gear/advice/vibration.shtml. I'm clearly no
> expert but there is something appealing about the idea that changes occur at
> the cellular level as the wood flexes at the nodes.
>
> I was thinking of getting one of these little 7500 watt gems but don't think
> my wife would appreciate it. Nor would my neighbors, come to think of it :).
>
> Jim
Hi Jim,
You don't have to go that far! Several people sell devices that hook up
directly to the bridge of a violin and vibrate it for breaking in purposes.
They use a lot less than 7,500 watts.
One person I know of has a web site, but I can't find the URL doing a search
on his name. I guess the web site is listed under his business name.
His name is Dennis Braun and he is in Texas, but all I can find are articles
by him. He is one of the guys who sells break in transducesrs.
I guess you put on a CD of your favorite violinist and the device drives the
bridge while you listen to your violin make beautiful music without you.
Personally I'd rather have the thrill of hearing my new violin come alive in
my hands, but commercial outfits want the customer to hear a violin at it's
best, so they seem to be the main users.