Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Rene Roy
I've never liked the bend on flatbacks. Why build in a weak point? Why add anything that stops the back from vibrating freely??? I understand the ergonomics of it, the tradition of it, etc...but I like the idea of doing it through a greater rib taper from end block to neck block and keeping the back vibrating more.
I've always likened the crease on a flatback like the creases they add to a car's hood or fender. The crease on the hood of a car adds rigidity, keeping the panel from vibrating at higher wind speeds and making it stronger without overly bracing it on the inside. I think keeping the plate vibrating freely can only be beneficial to the tone.
I'm not sure if there has been any Chladni studies on bass plates the way they do violins...but I have to imagine the bend making a pretty big disruption to the lines of the plate.
Thoughts?
|
The break is going to affect the rigidity of the back across the top bout, yes, but there's no reason why that's going to make the back as a whole any less resonant. It isn't like the break in and of itself is going to change the mass of the back or introduce any stress into it.
As for the resonance of the back goes in general - I'm not sure it even matters much; certainly in the case of an orchestra player resting the back on his knee there's not much there to resonate! And even if it is left free to resonate, it certainly isn't being driven anything like the way a top plate is, so comparing the two doesn't make sense even with a carved back...