Interesting article on the effects of fungus on a violin's sound:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/09/120908081611.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/09/120908081611.htm
Treatment With Fungi Makes a Modern Violin Sound Like a Stradivarius
- Thread starter Dean Maiorano
- Start date
- Status
combined with this:
http://www.popsci.com/technology/ar...nting-musical-instruments-and-instruments-war
you get something that I am not sure what to think of. I would like to think that craftsmanship matters.
http://www.popsci.com/technology/ar...nting-musical-instruments-and-instruments-war
you get something that I am not sure what to think of. I would like to think that craftsmanship matters.
In this war we need slogans!
"Put The Hand Back In Handcrafted"
"Put The (hu)MAN Back in Craftsmanship"
And so on...
Well if I have to be political I should point out that by man I meant mankind, regardless of gender... 
Fortunately, a lot of people do care about the human element and will pay more for a hand crafted item even if the quality can be matched or exceeded by machines.
Fortunately, a lot of people do care about the human element and will pay more for a hand crafted item even if the quality can be matched or exceeded by machines.
Need i point out that many other violin makers in the day had equal access to the same wood. Several lived within walking distance and probably drank at the same pub.
None of them produced the same violins.
The lady in the second article made a good point. Paraphrase -- People have so much to listen to that they don't pay the same attention as previous generations.
Cheap junk may sound the same as top quality to them. I know that is true in other arenas of discrimination.
None of them produced the same violins.
The lady in the second article made a good point. Paraphrase -- People have so much to listen to that they don't pay the same attention as previous generations.
Cheap junk may sound the same as top quality to them. I know that is true in other arenas of discrimination.
Well if I have to be political I should point out that by man I meant mankind, regardless of gender...
I mean the same as well...I guess me putting MAN in all caps detracted from the (hu) in front of it.
On account of those customers that know the difference we're all rewarded. However, too many shoppers think that they are supporting limited production or hand crafted products when in fact they are not. Typically encountered 'craft' products are mass or machine produced and such details are difficult if not impossible to ascertain.
Last edited:
My apologies, the main intention was to point out the interesting test done. I like all things wood and finding out that post construction changes can be made with fungus is fascinating. Of course, as with any natural product such influences should be expected. Exposure to moisture, light, etc. will all change the material one way or another.
Please note that I did not post the original article to devalue Stradivarius' hand crafted violins nor did I do so to challenge the legitimacy of their valuation.
I'm a supporter of HAND made goods. I have produced both hand crafted as well as machine manufactured work. I much rather produce the former where there is a market for it.
Last edited:
Great point, Mike. In addition, many 'non-fungalized' modern violins have beaten the Stradivarius in blind tests. I was just reading an article yesterday about Robert Needham, a self-taught but highly regarded luthier, who believes you can "tune" good harmonics into the instrument as you build it. One of his instruments also beat a Strad in a blind test.
A couple of years ago, I had the good fortune to hear a Stradivarius cello (yes, he made cello's too). I was no more than six feet away from it and it sounded amazing. However, the cellist was also a top professional and I think almost any good cello would have sounded amazing if he played it - at least to me. It's like the Tchaikovsky piano competition - 50 or so pianists play and only one wins. They all are amazing pianists. What distinguishes the winner from the losers? In my mind, and to my ear, nothing. However, to the keen and experienced ear of a master, there is a difference - real or perceived. As seen by the results of the blind tests, even those who are qualified to hear and judge these instruments can be incorrect.
Late in the last century, computer analysis of the scale design of a Steinway concert grand determined that the scale design was almost flawless. However, when Henry Steinway designed this scale in the 1850's he did so without the use of the computer. Instead, he used his instinct and genius. Nothing will ever take the place of that.
One thing I believe is that while the consistencies in the Strads (the wood density and air volume of the violins from the "Golden Period" were very consistent) made them very good, the inconsistencies is what made them great. He knew when to make one more pass with the scraper and when not to and the answer might be different on two violins that were almost identical up that point.
Also remember that they take the blindfolds off before writing the check...
Also remember that they take the blindfolds off before writing the check...
Ernie - great points of your own, thank you for the informative contribution to the thread.
Interesting thread. I have often marveled at the exquisite subtleties that some people can discern in areas such as hearing and taste. The example Ernie provided regarding those that can distinguish differences between highly capable musicians playing instruments such as the violin or piano. I often wondered if it was a curse or a blessing to be so discerning. I enjoy them all, just don't asked me to rank them. Also, some folks can pick subtle (in some cases perhaps not so subtle) differences among wines. As for me, I like most wines - cheap and/or expensive...once again, is it a curse or a blessing to have such a refined pallet? As for me, I am not blessed with exceptional discerning senses of hearing or taste, but I am happy.
Dean
Interesting read Dean. It amazes me how anyone that embraces modern technology gets labeled as a denier of sorts as far as quality goes.
When I built my log house from scratch you'd be surprised at the people that when they found out the logs were 6x12 milled timbers made all kinds of comments about the fact it wasn't a true log structure because the logs weren't hand hewed and the dovetails were cut with a chainsaw,circular saw and belt sander.
My response being there was no doubt in my mind that if sawmills, chainsaws, or any other modern tool had been available to the pioneers that's what they would have used.
Times change and everyone doesn't have a million or two to drop on a collectible but that doesn't mean they don't appreciate quality.
I guess some people are stuck in the past.
Wayne
No doubt there is truth in your statement. However, it seems to me the opposite is also true. Many people believe that the craftsmen/women who worked centuries ago were unsophisticated, crude, and less intelligent than their modern counterparts. The harpsichord revival of the first half of the 20th century is testament to this thinking. In the 19th century, due to the popularity of the developing piano, harpsichords were ridiculed as antique curiosities and almost no construction of new instruments took place. The early 20th century saw an awakening of interest in these antique instruments and a revival began. However, this revival suffered from the influence of the "superior" instrument, the piano. Rather than reviving the harpsichord, they re-invented it! They were convinced that, with their superior knowledge and sophistication, they could make significant improvements on the old "antique". The result was an instrument that was inferior in every way to the harpsichords of the past. The revival harpsichords were big, cumbersome, heavy instruments - sometimes built with totally unnecessary cast iron plates a la the piano. To increase tuning stability (and simplify the construction) plywood was extensively used as it moved less than solid lumber. That the original builders understood wood movement and allowed for it in their designs never occurred to the revivalists. The sought after improvements in tone and stability never materialized. Instead, they invented what is today derisively called "plucking pianos". In the 1950's Frank Hubbard and William Dowd had an epiphany and began building instruments based not on the "plucking pianos" but instead on the historical models. Their efforts led to the modern harpsichord - based on the work of builders who worked hundreds of years ago, and, in some cases, achieving similar results. Guess those old timers knew what they were doing after all!
I wouldn't say "stuck in the past" as much as "enjoy the practices of craft persons of the past". Even though I have modernized my woodwind making, no two that I make are exactly alike. I am not sure that making them all as exact duplicates would be better. I think having milled timbers exactly alike will make a better structure.
I think it is apples and oranges to compare building musical instruments or artwork with construction.
That being said, if there had been a HF in 17th c Cremona, Strad would likely have been a customer. But the difference would still be there in the fine work.
Andy
If you ever get the chance to read a book called The craft of log building authored by Hermann Phleps you might change you mind about the apples to oranges analogy.
Phleps was a german archetect that studied log structures in europe and japan and documented with photos how the structures evolved from a necessity to an art form. Most of these structures were several hundred years old and still structurally sound and in still in use at the time the book was written.
[h=3]The Craft of Log Building: A Handbook of Craftsmanship in Wood ...[/h]
Wayne
Well, I did not mean to insult the craft of log building but I still believe it is apples and oranges. Some of the apples are far better than other apples and the oranges are also of varying quality. But I doubt you will find one log cabin selling for 100 times more than one built as an exact duplicate.
Thanks everyone for the comments and discussion. Every point was well worth reading and remembering.
It's so nice to be back on this forum joining with some of the greatest and kindest people I've ever met online.
It's so nice to be back on this forum joining with some of the greatest and kindest people I've ever met online.
The fungus was clever but they still need luthiers to tune the wood with rasp and plane to bring out it's best tonal qualities. There is more to making a fine instrument than simply copying another fine instrument. Interesting articles though. I sincerely doubt violins made from fungus treated wood will be available to the average player anytime soon. If it's truly results in a premium product, it will carry a premium price tag.
They also need buyers to "buy it" in more ways than one. For a lot of people, it takes more than science to trump tradition.
- Status
